Is the outcome any different? Obviously whitaker doesn't lose as badly, but does he win? I realize with this I'm breaking with fightbeat legend of Whitaker invincibility by even entertaining the idea he would lose to trinidad....but I think it's worthy of discussion
I think Whitaker back then would have won yes. Anytime from 95 on up, I'd go with Trinidad, who by then was coming into his own and Whitaker was beginning to decline.
The early 90's Whitaker would make Tito look like the one dimensional zombie his haters paint him as.
Obviously? Can't see how Tito's length, timing and power....the same things that gave whitaker a problem in their actual fight,aren't a factor even against a younger whitaker.
The Whitaker that fought Tito had washed up reflexes, lead feet, and was a strung out coke head. At the peak of his ability his reaction time would be too good for Tito, and his use of angles too confusing for Tito.
This. Whitaker wins because of his defence, but Tito makes it close because he was an accurate puncher, with a great repertoire as well as his natural advantages in height, reach and power.
Yeah, he was a dead giveaway as a Whitaker hater 15 somethin years ago when he said Castillo would beat Pea.
