Both great performances but Hamed was a much better opponent than the undersized feather fisted Ayala he was also the favorite leading up to his fight with Barrera with many people thinking he would be too strong and had too much power for Barrera but Marco proved them wrong fighting the most disciplined fight of his career not only did he schooled Naz and gave him his first and only loss you can also say he ended Hamed's career. Barrera was the better performance and the much better win and in my view its not even close.
I love el Terrible (my second-favourite fighter ever) and I don't think he ever looked better - but it's obviosuly MAB-Hamed. Naz was a better fighter, with murderous power, who was a favourite to wipe the floor with Marco. That Barrera was able to out-box him and make him look foolish, was an exceptional performance.
Its hard to answer because Morales dominated Ayala better than Barrera dominated Naz but Naz was better than Ayala (IMO) Since you didnt state that quality of opposition should be taken on board I voted for Morales over Ayala.
MAB's performance was better. But I'm not sure where this 'Hamed was schooled' theory come into it. He came up against a very good fighter and only lost 112-115 on two of the scorecards. But for some reason it has been written as a schooling. Not sure I understand.
Have you seen the fight? Hamed lost every round and looked like a one armed drunk, when your dominated for 12 rounds your schooled.
So the official scorecards of 112-115 were an utter disgrace to you? O have watched the fight years ago, think I scored it 116-111, but it's hardly a schooling IMO. Joey C/ Lacy was a schooling. Don't get me wrong MAB won the fight, but history got it wrong for me.