Who is the most complete out of the 3 Amigos (Barrera, Morales, JMM)?

Most Complete-Barrera

Best-Morales

Most technical-Marquez

 

I agree that Marquez is the most technical but I think Barrera was the most well rounded AND the best of the three. I had him beating Morales 3 out of 3. Some might use the victory by Morales over Pac and Barrera's loss to Pac to justify Morales' as a better fighter but those people should remember that when Barrera and Morales first fought, several years before the Pac fights, Barrera was considered a spent bullet and past his prime. It was only after that fantastic fight that people realized Barrera was having a mid career resurgence and a change in style quickly extended his career by several more years. In addition to that he had started out two divisions south of those guys at least.

 

Marquez is the most complete because he can perform well against such a variety of styles from pure boxer moves or slicksters (Gainer, John, Norwood, Casamayor, Polo), to athletic punchers (Pacquaio), to pressure fighters (Diaz, Katsidis, Juarez, Salido). Barrera's weakness was against very quick outfighters (Pac and Jones) because he didn't have much of a staight right hand, Morales faced 1 real mover past his prime and got completely outboxed and he was also far easier to hit.

 

Not enough people recognize his ability against these types due to the robberies involved. I never thought about it this way, but I suppose he is the most equipped to deal with different styles.

 

Most complete would be a tie between Marquez and Barrera.

 

Ok, all 3 were awesome. I really want to talk about the Morales vs. Barrera fights.

Morales won the first fight... some felt Barrera won, I didn't. Anyway you look at it you can't say it was a robbery. It was definately a close fight.

Barrera won the second and third fights. A case can be made for Morales in these fights but again no robbery in either. Both were close fight.

So, 3 close fights... Barrera won 2 out of 3 but really not much seperated these 2 men in these 3 fights. If they fought 10 times we'd probably see 10 close fights.

Who was better between them? It's a tough call but I'm going with Morales.

Morales W12 Pac is big.

 

Barrera definitely

 

I don't believe that Marquez is the most complete because of his ability to do well against different types of fighters. Not at all, that just means he's good at what he does so much that he can fight how he always does and still succeed. Being complete is about being able to do different things well. Marquez for example (imo) beat Chris John even though on paper a pure boxer should beat him, because mobility is the weakness of Marquez quite blatantly. But Marquez was able to outpoint him regardless of the styles match-up simply because he was better than him. When it comes to a gulf in class then the styles match-up a lot of the time gets overrided (real word check?).

I think that if we're going to talk about 'most complete' which definitely warrants some kind of technical analysis and not just an effectiveness analysis (which would be simply looking at JMM getting the W on his record) then we should look no further than the Gainer fight. We can look at the fact that Marquez won and claim he was effective because he got the win, so credit to him for that, but we're discussing completeness here and we need to incorporate some kind of technical analysis. Watch the fight, his opponent is **** scared of him running away, actually running away. Marquez doesn't like that, he likes his opponents to either try and brawl with him or stand there and try to weave some feints and jabs and ****, and he just unloads on them with unreal combos with immaculate technique. With Gainer he had someone employing a lot of lateral movement, so JMM could had to come out of his comfort zone. Are you telling me the man was cutting down the ring like a 'complete fighter' would? The fight was the uggliest thing ever with JKK running round the ring like a mad man throwing shots at him.

No chance in hell would I ever call him a complete fighter, not with that footwork/mobility combination. His footwork was better in the Medina fight but never to the point where I would claim he was more complete than MAB. Nobody should be stupid and confuse what I'm saying with who is the better fighter, because that would be confusing completeness with effectiveness. Barrera is an actual complete technician, regardless of some mental strength issues that one may deem to be presesnt.

The answer is Barrera in my opinion , and no doubt.

 

Not again!

I agree with this.

 

Marquez

 

I think this is a flawed argument, JMM against Gainer gets to his range and and times a faster moving opponent clean time and again. He isn't cutting off the ring but he is still effective coming forward. MAB is probably better coming forward and cutting off the ring, but he can't use lateral movement against a southpaw to change the angles like JMM. MAB is primarily a left hooker, so he damn well better be more comfortable on the front foot. But JMM time and again proves himself against movers (John, Polo, Medina), John and Polo are very good in their own right, Polo was shafted against Scott Harrison and Chacon in title bids and maybe against Gainer too

MAB didn't have a right hand and outboxers with faster hands than him were his complete kryptonite, that's the definition of not quite being complete. Now he did manage to change his style to counter puncher and backfoot boxer but not the extent he was good enough to be competitive with Pacquaio

So Barrera maybe more effectively coming forward but he hasn't fought any good movers anyway. I'm not actually sure he'd beat Gainer, with Gainer's speed, range, movement. In the rematch against Morales where it's an outfight and MAB isn't coming forward he is far less effective

 

MAB beats that ***** version of Gainer, no worries.

 

I always thought Morales was the most and JMM just not as good at all as the other two.

 

Barrera, of course.