A career comparison. Marquez, Barrera and Morales.

A well past it Barrera almost beat JMM. Remember, Pac haters claim Barrera was already past it when he lost to Pac. He must have been shot to **** when he fought Juan.

 

What this debate is proving is that styles make fights.

1)argument one:Marquez is below Barrera because Barrera almost beat him.

Both are technical fighters, jmm doesn't shine as much when having to force the action or when he is not being chased. Barrera's style was able to give him problems.

2)argument 2: Marquez is better because he did better against PAC then Barrera.

Again, proves styles makes fights, jmm was able to challenge PAC due to his ability to better counter PAC and time him. However, a past prime Barrera gave jmm problems.

4) hypocrites:

Some of these arguments are based off fanboyisim. Read some comments saying jmm never beat PAC more then once and to "deal with it" yet some of the same trolls tried to send Bradley into retirement after his win over PAC. If you are going to go by official outcomes and not discuss the actual fight, then stick to that and accept Bradley defeated PAC. If you are a fan of the sport though then you know there is a lot more then "official" outcomes. Unfortunately some times its a popularity contest and the looser is the winner.

My point, all are great and just depends who you prefer, but I have no issue at all with them being ranked over one another. All 3 had their deep battles and made their mark.

 

My rankings: Morales, Barrera, and then Marquez. I hate to refer to anyone as cheat without hard evidence, but Marquez really does look to have been on something recently.

 

morales>barrera>jmm

morales beat barrera's daddies...

i would have put jmm over barrera but he is tainted with the hiring of heredia

 

I think all 3 were on a similar level technical wise, Morales wasn't as fancy as Marquez, but when he wanted, he could be very technical, he showed that in the 1rst Pacquiao fight, when most thought he didn't have a chance. I get tired of hearing Barrera being faded by the time Marquez fought him which is true, but Marquez was at his best at 126 also, he wasn't prime when he faced Barrera either. He had competitive fights with Norwood and John, which I think he won. Marquez lived in their shadow and obviously the most consistent of the 3, had the healthier lifestyle too. All 3 bouts in the Barrera-Morales trilogy were too close to call, a case could be made Morales could of won 2 outta 3 as well. H2h Morales was the best, he beat both Pacquiao and Mayweather in his prime or close to it, MAB in his actually deserved the win in the first Morales fight and owned Hamed as well as Chico, and in Marquez's prime, Pacquiao, John, and Norwood all needed the judges to give them gift decisions in order to win. Marquez didn't really have a loss to anyone until he faced Mayweather and Bradley.

 

I like all three.

IMO Morales was the best of them.

There's a lot to respect about them all.

 

Floyd Sr asked a prime Morales to spar Floyd who was in his prime. A naturally smaller man shouldn't be bossing a larger man, a great one even more, but that's what El Terrible did with Floyd. Prime Morales was unbeatable. We all know Morales-Comebacking Barrera left their primes that historical night in their first fight. Barrera schooled a prime Chico too, just goes to show Lil Featherweight Fab 4 of Morales, Marquez, Pacquiao, and Barrera > Lightweight Fab 4 of Mayweather, Castillo, Corrales, and Casamayor.

 

Same, thought not by much!

 

And JMM KTFO6! So pretty much this trio isn't that good.