Higher P4P: Carlos Zarate or Marco Antonio Barrera

One thing is for sure is that MAB has fought much stiffer comp

 

Nah, really, I dont know enough about Zarate`s career to make comparisons but its always nice to read the views of those that are qualified.... seems as tho Barrera has the edge so far.

 

Holw is Canizales' record proof he coluldn't have done those things.He very well could have rose to the challenge had he been in a heavily hyped superfights in his prime.It's tough to say for sure.

 

This will be wildly inaccurate in all probability, as I don't have a top 100 at the moment, but I'd estimate at Barrera being around 75-80 and Zarate around 95-100.

I hear you about Zarate's title reign, but Barrera beat some really stiff comp in his career too, and he has marquee wins/performances that Zarate doesn't have, and he has multi-weight success and longevity on his side too. I'm really surprised that most people think this is a close one.

OK, write Barrera's loss to Pacquiao and Zarate's loss to Gomez off as losses to two of the elite fighters of their generations, no shame in being blitzed by a higher level ATG on either side.

Are Zarate's good performance/close loss to Pintor and wins over Zamora, Ferreri, Martinez and Batista better than Barrera's two wins over Morales and win over Hamed, McKinney, Paulie Ayala, Tapia, Juarez, Peden?

The difference in quality between those sets of wins surely is not enough to offset Barrera's advantages in other areas?

 

All I'm saying is that he did not prove his ability to the same extent as Barrera. Canizales never outfought someone as good as Morales, so we can't say with any certainty he was capable of such a feat. Canizales was 30-31 when he lost to Vasquez and Jones, the same age as Barrera was when he conclusively beat Morales in the clincher and dismantled Paulie Ayala. I just think Barrera proved his mettle at a higher level in a way that Canizales failed to do in his career, therefore we must consider Barrera to have been the superior fighter.

 

Don't disagree with that at all, just thought Zarate was getting a bit of stick. With your explanation here it's clear that wasn't the case:good

 

Neither man's record is among the more notable of the sport to me, to be honest.

barrera has his trilogy with Morales that really defines his career, and more "superfight" kind of bouts, against Hamed, Marque and Pac though that could easily be argued as an upset loss in a fight he was supposed to win.

The next lot down for Barrera has never impressed me...Tapia, Kelley, Peden, Salud, ayala etc ...

I prefer the men Zarate fought to that crop quite clearly, especially, Pintor Davila, Martinez, Zamora and Ferreri...Mckinney is the one man who i put on that level, likely above Ferreri overall but not the others.The poor man's Herol Graham and Marquez should be in this category as well really.



I'm not going to hold not jumping up in weight as well agauinst Zarate considering the likes of Gomez were around.The main thing that gets me about him is how he dealt with the Gomez loss, Barrera showed far superior ability to rebound, though things may have been different had he got the Pintor fight.

All this said, i think it's close, but i feel the dominance and peak ability factor might be being downplayed a bit excessively here

 

I can agree with that.canizales is a fighter i often feel there was just a little something missing, as far as the drive to really be great goes.

 

Davila is a nice little operator, even if I have only seen him in losing efforts

Mantequilla, what did you think of Batista? I felt he put in a spirited effort and looked a compact and solid Bantam, ended out fading fast after the Zarate loss. A good win?

 

Yeah, he seemed solid enough, but that's the only time i've seen him in action unfortunately.

 

Same here, and apparently didn't go on to do much. Was undefeated at the time, was just wondering if it was worth extra kudos in my rating of Zarate. It was a methodical breaking down of the opponent though, and Zarate showed how hurtful a puncher he could be.

One thing that does gripe with me is the fact that Zarate didn't train hard for the Gomez fight (neither did Gomez) How could he struggle to move up in weightatsch

 

Davila was a very good fighter and the only reason he didnt win a title sooner was cause he fought the best he gave Pintor hell, and unfortunatly lost to atg like Zarate and Gomez. He was only 5'2 but had great boxing skills and a decent punch. His fight with Frankie Duarte was a great War. He was a solid champ too,but he was already getting older when he lost to Lora.
I used to know him from the gyms in the LA area he trained a few guys most notably David Kamau. He was a spunky little dude kind of like a younger Mickey from Rocky Hed berate Kamau real bad and tell him that he would have kicked his ass.
Unfortunatly when he won the title Kiko Bejines died in the ring.

 

Yeah, Davila is a good fighter. His fight with Pintor is on youtube, but I guess you don't feel I'm warranted to talk about it as I didn't watch it when first broadcast

 

Wouldnt put to much weight in that win flea..aside the fact that Zarate looked brutal in it.

Never really found much on Batista and have never seen in him any other fights. He looked ok and started well but his record suggests he had quite the inflated record coming in to that fight.

I can tell you he was ranked 6th or 7th depending on what source you read...and they must not have had thought to much of him as they had already signed Carlos to fight two months later against Juan Rodriguez the spaniard weeks before this fight had even taken place.

Carlos was supposed to go up to superbantam after the Rodriguez fight in the interviews Ive read...not sure what happened but its good that he fought Davila instead as he is a fine scalp after two average ones.

 

Na i talk **** when i feel im being slighted on my knowledge,but i know that you know your stuff. Just dont assume that i get my info from Boxing records Ive seen the fighters i talk about .