Re: Greater Win: PBF (against corrales) or PACQUIAO (against barrera 1)

and continued to dominate the division afterwards.

 

Well said Monstar :good

Yep came back and was the first to stop Paulie Ayala a fighter that Morales couldn't stop.

 

This I agree with.

 

Barrera was not fresh off his victory over Hamed. That was 4 fights and 2 years before. :good

That said Barrera was far from being shot, as people have already said, he went onto bat Ayala, Morales, and Juarez. Ayala was the much smaller man, and Juarez is average at best though. Morales was his last great performance, along with Marquez.

It's Pacquiao vs Barrera 1.

 

Pac over Barrera.

 

:good

 

Corrales was an undefeated killer who nobody wanted to fight. I mean everyone was scared shitless of him but prettyboy was the one warrior willing to take him on. I remember alot of people picking corrales too. BUt not only did floyd beat him but he dominated him and took his heart.

Floyd/Chico shits all over pac/barrera..... BArrera was an aging fighter at the time.

 

Here we go with the age thing again...MAB turned pro in 1989 he was given NO chance to beat Hamed...It was said that he was fighting for a payday, that was two years before....Age has nothing to do with a fighter being shot...How old was Vargas when he was shot???

MAB a legend so that means that is a huge win no matter what??? Lets see if you feel that way after he loses his next fight. that was about as weak an argument you could make.

I will take two prime p4p fighters anytime over a young gun and an aged former great anyday..

What has MAB done since that fight with Pac??? should have lost to Juarez, was outclassed by JMM, pretty much lost ever fight vs top level fighters, guys that he would have most likely beatten a few years before, that my friend means that he is shot:good

 

:rofl barrera was the featherweight king at the time and pacman was a nobody. He was the underdog in that fight and he shocked the world. Floyd on the otherhand was already a champion when he fought corrales.

both are a great win for both fighter but in a long run pacman's win would be considered greater cuz barrera will go down as one of the best ever ahead of the great chico corrales. :good:good:good

 

pac's victory is greater just because it was barrera on top of his game but floyd's win over chico was also damn impressive.

 

And just like how age has nothing to do with a fighter being shot, the year they started boxing also has nothing to do with a fighter being shot. So what if MAB started at 1989? Some fighters have short careers and get "ring" old quickly while some fighters have so much longevity that they keep fighting at the top level for a long time. MAB is of the latter. When he lost to Junior Jones twice everybody was saying that he was shot and he would never be the same again, yet he went on to prove everybody wrong by 1.) having a an FOTY fight with the favored Morales in 2000 and 2.) One-sidedly beating the heavily favored Hamed. He went on a winning streak after that and then loses to Pac, and now he is shot again? FYI not every fighter is shot whenever he loses, mate.

Just because some people thought he was shot in 2003 doesn't make it true. Not at all. Just like what he did after he lost to Jones, he then proved everybody wrong again by winning all the time after that loss to Pac. What were the people saying when he was about to fight EM the 3rd time? That he was shot or past his prime and that EM should beat him convincingly. Yet what happened? The Barrera of the old shows up and beats EM. Then he kept on winning. Including a domination against Robbie Peden who was in no way a "bum". Oh hold on, you said Juarez should've beat him(which I disagree MAB still beat him in that first fight), but that argument is easily erased when MAB beat him pretty clearly in the rematch.

Then he met JMM. A shot fighter should've easily lost to JMM right? especially after that "poor" performance against Juarez. Yet what happened? He gave JMM one of his toughest fights at the time. KDing him in the process. He was FAR from being outclassed in that fight as you put it. MAB gave a highly competitive fight in which some people even thought he won.

So how does a fighter, who was on a winning streak, had one loss, then went back on that streak again be shot? I swear MAB is the only fighter I've seen in which people claim he's shot on the back of a dominating performance against a highly favored opponent and a WINNING STREAK which put him on the highest levels of the P4P rankings. What a SHOT fighter!!atsch

 

ownage

 

I swear on my soul I am being as objective as a human being can be - Pacquiao over Barrera IS the better win. It can be argued over which is the better performance (personally I think PBF's performance over Corrales is slightly better, for me that performance is up there with Hopkins-Trinidad and Jones-Toney as the closest thing to perfection there has been since the decline of Pernell Whitaker), but Barrera was a significantly better fighter than Corrales, and Pacquiao was a ****ing nobody at the time except to Filippinos or hardcore fans of the lower weights. I genuinely feel a vote for Floyd is a biased and irrational choice in this particular poll.

 

anyone can say anything just to downgrade someones victory. some would say that chico was weight-drained in his fight with floyd but i'm sure that was just to discredit floyd's win. both amazing victories, just one is much greater than the other.