A question for those that rank Barrera over Morales.....

I`ve seen a better version of Holyfield look like absolute shite long before this farce of a fight, I`ve seen Valuev fight maybe twice, that`s 2 too many times. I don`t need to see Whitaker vs mayweather to know it would be a technical boxing match of the highest order, same rule applies for Holyfield-Valuev, I`m not subjecting myself to that `tripe` mate.

 

Marquez was past prime against MAB too with his first fight at 130, both were the same age. Barrera started becoming much more defensive and less offensive above 122. Morales was as much a victim of his ill discipline as he was his wars. In the Pacquaio rematch lack of conditioning was the problem as much as anything, which was apparent when he hired a laughable conditioning coach for the rubber match. He was in wars because of his lack of defense and ring smarts though, fun to watch but like Gatti not great boxing tactics.

Both MAB and Morales avoided Marquez at FW. Arum kept Morales well away from Marquez when both were at FW

Marquez would have outsmarted Morales and maybe outpunched him prime for prime. Bad style for Morales aside, he never did well against counter punchers or defensive technicians.

 

Honestly, didn't think that MAB-Morales III was close.

I've had it 116-112 Barrera every time I've watched it, no matter the commentating. Barrera was sharper, cleaner, landed in combination that was resounding and eye catching, and easily hurt Morales far more and more often than he was hurt back. Especially early; He was REALLY ripping him over the first half.

I think that win elevates him to Morales and Marquez's level, honestly. Thought he rather clearly deserved the first fight(ESPECIALLY with a KD, **** call though it was), and very clearly deserved the 3rd. He proved himself superior to Morales when they fought, and his resume is VERY much the better for it.

 

I do rank MAB ahead of Morales.. and really.. the 3rd fight didn't make that happen.. it had already happened... that was just the icing on the cake.

 

Morales did pretty well vs a peak Barrera twice & the skills of Marquez are not superior to those of Barrera.

Morales definitely has the skills to box with Marquez & without question has the chin, pace & grit to outscore JMM in a war.... you underrate Morales (or overrate Marquez)

 

I`d really love to know which 8 rounds you gave to Barrera, that`s ridiculous to be honest.... maybe you were watching the 2nd fight & got the 2 fighters mixed up :think

 

Nob.

 

I had it the same score.

Ever stop to think it might be you that's ridiculous?

 

I'm so used to seeing flea being trolled, I dunno if this is a serious thread or not.

I'll join in though, Flea, for **** sake man watch fights with no commentary and learn a thing or two about the sport

 

Possibly, doubt it though. Anyone that thinks that was an 8-4 fight is a ****ing ******, ridiculous is too kind a word. Its an insult to Morales performance & an exaggeration of Barrera`s performance to only give Morales 4 rounds in that fight, its that simple.

 

It doesn`t take much for him to get going to be fair, but that`s not what I`m doing. Some guys see what they want to see, especially if its backed up by biased commentators, I`m just here to enlighten them.

 

Yeah, definitely think there's no bias from where you're sitting.

 

Definitely true of some.

 

Not unreasonable. What is unreasonable is Bill's insistence that if anyone won clearly, it was Barrera. You said yourself that Morales needed a strong effort to clinch a draw. I don't think it's out of the question to have Barrera winning at least one of those two.