Prime Barrera vs Prime Marquez

Marquez's skills have been eroding since 2006. Clearly beyond any reasonable doubt. It's just a coincedence that he's been getting bigger fights recently while he's been eroding at the same time. This is so obvious I can only assume you haven't watched his best fights at 126lbs.

If Marquez of 2003 fought the same Barrera two years ago, Marquez would have dominated that Barrera thoroughly. While Barrera might well still sneak 3 or 4 rounds, Marquez would have won his rounds even more convincing than he did. Why? Because he was a better and more efficient fighter. Quicker on his feet, faster hands, and better ability to pull the trigger. Just plain better right across the board.

 

I stopped listening when you said Marquez had faster hands. Video evidence would be fantastic at this point, Robbi. :good I'll keep checking the thread until you come up with it.

 

Marquez would take a close decision.

And where did this thing about Barrera being shot came from? His balance, reflexes, and stamina were all still there when he fought Marquez.

What some of you failed to realize is that both men fought out of their comfort zones that night. Barrera had become a little more laid back, less aggressive, and preferred to let the KO come to him instead of looking for it. Marquez, as a counter-puncher stands back and lets the aggressive fighters come to him so that he could go to work. When Barrera and Marquez met, they both were forced to switch roles. It was JMM that went on to push the fight, to engage MAB, to pull him out a passive state because thats what he needed to do to win the fight. MAB was forced to fight the fight he didn't want and fell short in the skill department.

They didn't have a fight dependent of speed, volume, and youth, but a competitive fight of pure skill and strategy, in which Marquez got the better of Barrera.

If we put two prime versions of these guys against each other, we see an aggressive and skillful Barrera pushing on against a brilliant counter-punching machine in Marquez, where in my opinion, Marquez walks away with a very hard earned victory.

 

Marquez had faster hands 4-5 years ago than he does now. Without question. You obviously think I said Marquez has faster hands than Barrera. I will walk naked through my town tommorow if you can give me evidence where I said that. I can only assume thats what you have thought with such a reply. If you really think Marquez never had faster hands 4-5 years ago compared to now or when he fought Barrera, and you have digested me correctly, god help you.

 

Marco Barrera had fought like that since Salud. :good

Barrera feel short because whereas he was at the tail end of his career, Marquez was just getting his first great win on his record. Let's not get twisted. The age is similar, but Marquez had not had the taxing career that Marco enjoyed through the 90s and 2000s. Skill level was on an even keel for most part, but Marquez finished strong as he always does. A close fight.

Barrera did no body work, and his reflexes, hand speed, and stamina was not what it was in 2000. He was not shot, but he was declining. No doubt about it.

No argument here.

 

Prime for prime, slight edge for Barrera. 2003 Marquez against 2007 Barrera, Marquez clearly quicker.

 

:good

 

Exactly. This debate could go on all night, but in the end it doesn't seem like we will change Robbi's mind and he certainly won't change mine. Of course Marquez was faster when he was younger, most boxers and most human beings are, but in no way does that equate to him being a better boxer. It's easy to look good against mediocre fighters, it's hard to look good against top level comp, for me that's pretty obvious. For what Marquez has lost with age (a little of his speed, reflexes etc), he has more than made up for by developing in many other ways. Like Hopkins and Calzaghe, he is an all-round better fighter in his mid 30s than in his physical peak of mid to late 20s.

 

Do we need video evidence? Sometimes it's obvious and video evidence not needed my friend :good

 

Read my earlier post on Calzaghe.

 

The way it was worded sounded like you were saying Marquez had better handspeed than Barrera. Marco had the edge in hand speed.

 

Show me where. Not saying you are wrong. Just need it highlighted.

 

Here?

The highlighted part is me making a comparison to the Marquez of 2003 compared to the one who fought Barrera two years ago. I wasn't saying the Marquez of 2003 was quicker on his feet faster, and better ability to pull the trigger than the Barrera of two years ago, even though thats also the case as well.

 

I understand that now. There is no argument here, I apologize.

 

And by the way, Marquez would be Barrera by a slim margin in their primes IMO. I think it would have been amazing fight. If someone thinks Marquez was more skilled, fair enough, same applies to Barrera.