Ok, after a disappointing night last night all we have is 1 more fight to be made to complete the series. WBC 140 titlist Erik Morales Vs Juan Manuel Marquez. For me it's also the logical fight to make. It gives Marquez a (justified) chance once again to become Mexico's only 2nd 4 weight world champion. Also, quickly while were here how does last nights result effect Mexico's boxing history. Marquez would of had a realistic chance to become a 5 weight world champion when only until recently the nation struggled to get to the number 4 (even Morales had a fairly soft touch in Cano). For me that would be a massive achievement. Even in the days of having 8 divisions he would be a 3 weight world champ. How would you rate that against the Countries ATG's :think Anyway back on topic, Barrera gets the better of Morales over 3 thrilling fights, who becomes the first of the 3 to beat Pacquiao and later lose the next 2, who dominates Barrera twice and has 2 wins and a draw (controversially) against Marquez, who has a solid win against a past prime Barrera. It's like a ****ing merry-go-round. So lads, how would you rate these four and why. Try and do this on a H2H basis without taking their other wins into account :thumbsup
Oh, God this again :-( (100 pages ;-)) Pacman Barrera Morales Marquez You won't get any reasons this time of night. But I felt Barrera got the better of his series with Morales, Morales has the win over Pac', Marquez should be 2-0-1 against Pacquiao IMO. Marquez has got better with age and overcome a patchy 126 tenure to become undisputed Lightweight champ'.....I think the Mexicans are very close due to Marquez's late career surge. Ask me when they've all retired
I'm also not sure that Marquez was ever the definitive no.1 at 126. And at this stage he'd smash 'El Terrible' to pieces.
I'm not going to make a post on the actual thread subject till tomorrow but one thing I want to raise. Morales the first 4 weight champ. Yes that's the way it is on paper but he hasn't beat a top ten light welter. It bugs me. The man in my avatar has titles in 4 weights, granted that includes interim but he defended that interim several times. For me, he's more of a 4 weight champ than morales.
and there me thinking i was making a good debate. TommyOC i see your pain, Marquez should also be a 4 weight world champ.
I'll have a propa crack at this tomorrow. I'll say that Pac is the number 1 tho. Last night didn't change my mind
Their respective victories when winning their ''titles'': Arce: Vazquez Jr Angky Angkotta(Concepcion was for an interim belt) Priolo(interim) Cordoba Morales: Cano(Bradley stripped of title or something? Was that why?) Chavez Espades Zaragoza They both acheived this ''record'' in bogus circumstances, but the fact that Morales' wins are easily superior make his accomplishment the far more legitimate one, regardless of whether people want to twist it so Arce got there ''first''. Who you've defended it against is irrelevant, when you've won it you've won it, and it's the wins he scored to become ''champion'' that get looked at in this ridiculous scenario. If there was any justice Montiel would be about to win it soon enough. Arce's not a real four weight champion and neither is Morales, every belt Montiel has won to this point has been legitimate(in todays scheme of things) and the belt he may or may not win at 122lbs will more than likely be an actual ''world'' title too. People may say it's hypocritical to baulk at the fact Arce beat someone as poor as Priolo and then campaign for Montiel when he won his title against a novice in Morales, but at the very least Montiel's win was for a 'full' world title, and on top of that he was actually rated at the weight due to his win against Silva, rather than jumping up to fight a relative soft touch. I know it's comepletely hypothetical, but the fact is neither Arce nor Morales are true 4 weight ''world'' champions by todays standards, never mind relevant historical standards, and shouldn't be regarded as such. Anyways, the actual topic at hand, I'd have it: Pacquiao Barrera Morales/Marquez Pacquiao's pretty much far and away in first. As well as being a superior fighter than Morales, MAB won the trilogy(and won it 2-0-1 IMO, some days I'd even go 3-0). The Pacquiao trilogy elevates Marquez to a very similar level to Morales due to his performances - and for me victories - over the course of the three fights, while Morales' superior body of work outside of that keeps them pretty close. Longevity doesn't really come into it, Marquez's older but Morales' been fighting at a higher level for longer. I'll do a more adequate breakdown/explanation tomorrow, couldn't be bothered right now. Though it's merely seperating the latter two really, the top two are set in stone. Barrera>Morales, always.
****ing hell!!!!!!!!!!! This is tricky..................... Pacquiao has to be out in front but the other three I find very difficult to split. I find it difficult to see much daylight between Morales and Barrera as they both face similar opponents. The both beat the likes of Paulie Ayala and Kevin Kelly. Barrera - McKinney, Tapia, and the big win over Hamed etc Morales - McCullough, Chavez and the big win over pacquiao etc Barrera losing in his prime twice to Junior Jones and the ease with which Morales dealt with the same fighter a year later. I know this has no real bearing as styles make fights but does give a little more significance to the win. Add to that the way Morales came back to perform against Maidana and the winning of a 4th world title (although against a limited opponent). I maybe give a slight edge to Morales, but ask this question again tommorrow and I'd probably give you a different answer. Marquez is also very difficult because he should now IMO have at least one victory over Manny (I personally think 2). He didn't do as much as Morales and Barrera in the early part of his career but has shown better longevity. To step up and become undisputed Lightweight champion and beating the likes of Casamayor, Diaz twice and Katsidis has been very impressive. Does it make up for the lack of comparable depth in the early part of his career? The loses to Norwood and John at that stage also tarnish him a little. As it stands I'm going to go for Pacquiao Morales Barrera Marquez But there is still time for this to change and as I say ask me the same question tomorrow and I'll probably see it in another way.
In terms of the actual results then pac is clearly top, this changes dramatically if JMM gets 2 out of the 3 fights given to him. But dealing with the facts.. PAC Morales Marquez Barrera
