Showdown @ 135lb. Arguello v Whitaker

Here's one I've been pondering for a while, this morning.

Alexis Arguello, the pick of many as the greatest superfeather who ever stepped into the ring, against Pernell Whitaker, the defensive wizard who invariably makes the top five in all time lightweight lists. Each of them, additionally, a popular pick as being in or around the twenty greatest fighters of all time, p4p.

Wonderful contrast in styles, here. Whitaker all angles and trickery, with marvellous footwork and reflexes ; Arguello, patient and deliberate, and capable of exploding with devastating power to switch the lights out, though less so at 135lb. Does Arguello's significant height and reach advantage make it difficult for Whitaker to run the show with his jab ? Does Arguello carry sufficient power up to 135lb. to upend Whitaker, and can he plant his feet for long enough to land cleanly and decisively while Whitaker is weaving his magic ?

I've been going round in circles trying to sort this one out and, just at this moment, I'm leaning ever so slightly toward Whitaker weathering an uncomfortable moment or three before taking a narrow but clear decision over fifteen.

What say you all ?

Ouch, I don't like having to pick between these two, Windy!

However, if forced to make a call, I'd probably agree with you and go with Whitaker's elusiveness and trickery to begin to frustrate Arguello around the half way mark, leaving him open to plenty of point scoring shots for Pernell as he came increasingly wide open looking to land something of substance.

I'd have it close at half way, with Arguello's aggressive style impressing, but would take Whitaker to pull away in the second half of the fight, giving him a decision by about 3 or 4 rounds.

I dont think Arguellos diminished power is at 135 is overly significant because I dont see him stopping Whitaker regardless.

My guess would be this is the kind of fight tht could throw up three very different scorecards due to the clash of styles and which one prefers. I would lean towards Arguello as he has the style to please the judges more often and I think Whitaker would struggle to make his defensive savvy look good aganst it.

But I would envisage lots of close rounds capable of going either way which could throw up any and all kind of scorecards.

Whitaker. Alexis was peerless at 130, but at 135, one could pick holes in both his record and performances. The 130 lb Arguello would not have let Watt off the hook after flooring him with loads of time to go in the seventh; he would not have allowed a scrapper like Mancini to get as far as the 14th, either, and above all, he would never have dropped a decision to a counter-puncher of the second rank like Vilomar Fernandez. That last defeat is the clue to the likely result of Whitaker-Arguello at 135. Alexis' one weakness of any note was average foot speed and I couldn't see him getting set often enough to land those marvellous straight punches of his. I could see the rounds following a similar course to each other, ending in a result of Whitaker by comfortable decision.

I'd edge towards Whitaker as well personally. I think the Captain hits the nail on the head pointing to Arguello's average foot speed, something Pernell has in abundance. Though it has the potential to be scored waywardly by judges who prefer aggression, the cleaner work is most likely to come from Whitaker in this one. Whitaker by decision, probably with the odd scary moment as Windy alluded to earlier.

I think the differences in weights lower down, especially in these new divisions like super featherweight is often over emphasised. Have never been too sold on the idea that a few pounds can make all the difference between a fighter being great and good. With Arguello I tend to think his super featherweight career was just reflective of him during his peak years. I would be surprised if an extra 4/5 pounds made a huge difference to him in a hypothetical peak v peak fight.

Think Whitaker has the neccessary tools to win but I think the rounds would be close things and in such cases the more defensive stlyes like Whitakers can come out second best to the more direct ones like Arguello.

Don't totally agree with you there, CL. When Alexis lost to Fernandez at the full lightweight limit, he was less than halfway through his amazing title reign at 130. The extra 4 or 5 pounds shouldn't make that much difference, but it's amazing how often it does.

Wilfredo Gomez another case in point - couldn't budge the admittedly great Sanchez at 126, so went back down to KOing opponents for fun at 122. Back up at 126, won a title, but very average at the weight, and again, barely a trace of his fearsome power at 122. Peculiar, really...

The Fernandez fight was a non title affair. Im more inclined to think it was a case of Arguello slipping up, not fully motivated or whatever reason as opposed to the weight. Were the weight the issue then its unlikely he would have made any impact at lightweight whatsoever on the basis of tht fight.

Before these new sub categories came in the greats of the past eras often fought giving away significant weight advantages and their quality prevailed for the most part. Certainly dont think its a case of adding a few pounds and you go from being an all time great super featherweight to losing to Fernandez level opposition.

Depending on the fighter in question, their power may dimish as they go up (though it can also increase in some cases) but prior to the introduction of all these new categories seperated by no more than a handful of pounds, greats were able to cope fine and I dont think a small handful of pounds maes that large a difference.

Otherwise one would have to go back to past eras and start recategorising wins on the basis of percieved serious weight disadvantages/advantages.

I think that it underscores the brilliance of those fighters of the past who had just eight divisions to play with and yet were capable of great feats against top men well above their natural level, CL. In Arguello's case, I think that he was an extremely good featherweight, and the same as a lightweight, but that he was something more than that at 130. Just fitted him so well, that weight. Whitaker, of course, was a genius at 135 and not a lot less of one at 147; still believe that he is largely underrated by a lot of pundits who regard him as not all that interesting to watch.

Does Whitaker do enough? Is Arguello able to score through workrate even though he's not connecting with most of the many umpteen punches he's throwing?

I'm going to put splinters in my arris and sit on the fence and call it a draw.

I want to go for Arguello with every fibre in my body but tend to feel i'm basing it more on my love for him and dislike for Whitaker, a great fighter who bored the hell out of me, we all know who's going to get the decision and that's Arguello so he's the obvious choice.

Would go with the general feeling and back Whitaker to win this, particularly considering it's a Lightweight bout we're talking of here. At 135 lb, Whitaker was peerless. Arguello was a master at what he did; standing on the proverbial handkerchief without conceding ground, evading punches with his lateral movement and relying on punishing his opposition with those crisp straight punches, particularly the right. However, that simply isn't the kind of fighter who is going to upset Pernell, who forced just about everyone to chase him. Arguello applied subtle pressure brilliantly, but I don't think he's going to enjoy literally having to chase his opponent around the ring, which he's almost certainly going to have to do here.

Too much gets made of Whitaker's apparently 'low' workrate, too. He was deceptively busy and his counter-punching from up close - on the occasions that his opponents managed to get close - was as good as anyone's. I think he takes advantage of Arguello having to leave his comfort zone and boxes his way to a decision.

Whittaker is all wrong for most of the greatest Lightweights ever and at 135 Argeullo was not at his greatest. Too quick, too slick and considering 'Sweet Pea' went all the way up to 154, he could also have been too big as well.