Fighters that I find hard to split.....

Yeah i know what you mean, i was only kidding with the first post like, (which you knew). It's quite a tough one BB.

 

I can't see how anyone could rank Marquez over Barrera currently? Their resumes are worlds apart. Both Morales and Barrera are still ahead of Marquez, and that will not change unless Juan wins a title up at 140lb or gets a signature win (Pacquiao, Mayweather). At least in my eyes.

I just find it amusing that you think Barrera should be subjected to such a debate whereas Morales shouldn't. How the hell can Marquez be higher? Sure, he was more successful at 135lb, but he started at 126lb whereas both Erik and Barrera started at 122lb. Well, Barrera started out at 115lb in reality. He could have contested for a title there early on.

As I say, their resumes are worlds apart. Marquez's best win is arguably a past his prime Barrera at 130lb, not Marco's best weight anyhow. Marcos' best wins are against two undefeated fighters, one of which will go down in history as the second greatest 122lb ever, and a fellow HOF ATG in his respective prime.

:-( I can appreciate Marquez's skills, but seeing is believing.

 

there my picks!

 

Why is it so hard to split Barrera and Marquez? You rank Morales higher than Marco based on his superior resume? Well Dinamita can't **** with the Baby faced assassin in that regard.

 

Okay mate.

Perhaps I am just a bit grumpy today. My Carbajal highlight is taking forever to upload on youtube. That mother****a' could fight.

Marquez is on their level in terms of ability, but he doesn't have the resume and he HAS had the opportunities.

 

I have no problem with anyone thinking Morales is the better fighter, no problem at all, I don't think history has ever thrown up two fighters more closely matched in every conceivable way (ability, resume, achievement etc). But I genuinely can't see how an objective scoring of each fight in the trilogy can leave you with the impression that Morales got the better of it. I have seen all three many times, and I'm convinced Barrera edged both I and III, with Morales sneaking II.

 

Some peerless fighters mentioned here

 

:good I find it disturbing that some people think Morales put on a Boxing exhibition in their second fight. Bill Butcher scored it very wide in favor of El Terrible. I think there's a misconception that Morales had an amazing first half of the fight. I didn't see it that way. For my money, neither fighter did anything particularly impressive through 6 rounds, but Morales just did that little bit more.

I felt Marco clearly deserved the verdict in their third encounter, whereas I have no problem anybody scoring their first fight in 2000 for Morales. The fight was that good, it didn't matter to me who won.

 

I gave Barrera round 7 because he inflicted the more damage. He also had Morales reeling and on the verge of a knockdown with seconds remaining.

I gave Barrera round 9 because he badly hurt Morales with a left uppercut during the first 30 seconds, which had the great warrior running back into the turnbuckle. He also then followed that up with several rights and lefts on the other side of the ring after buckling Erik..again. Erik then controlled most of the round with shoe shining, but then with a few seconds left Barrera landed three FLUSH hard shots to the head that once again had Erik reeling backwards.

That'll be where our scorecards don't add up.