Quite a few years have passed since these guys were on top of the boxing world. My evaluations of them and how they stack up to one another. Marco Antonio Barrera Pros - Won the Morales trilogy - Was the most consistent of all three - Reinvented himself and became a better fighter after the Jones losses - Embarassed Hamed Cons -Should not have lost to Jones -Destroyed by Pacquiao in absolute prime -Loss to Marquez, but some allowance for being faded Erik Morales Pros -Has the biggest win of either three -Defeated Barrera -Most physically dominant of the three -Never Knocked out in prime -Defeated Jones -Only 1 man beat him in his prime Cons - Lost Barrera trilogy - Prone to meh performances against average opposition - Did not fight Marquez or Hamed - Poor longevity denying himself the chance to defeat Pacquiao again and denying Pacquiao chance for meaningful redemption Juan Manuel Marquez Pros - Most technical of the three - Gave prime Pacquiao two tough fights - Aged the best - Knocked out Pacquiao, but not the peak Pacquiao - Did defeat Barrera, but not the peak Barrera Cons - No signature win, never beat a great fighter at their peak - Never fought Morales or Hamed - Norwood loss was bad There you have it. In retrospect while all three are great I do believe there is separation. Barrera and Morales are just a notch above Marquez IMO. And Morales and Barrera are about as close a call as it gets.
Marquez ktfo Pac at almost 40 years old . That was impresive he fought all pacs peak or not peak . he only won when judges couldnt rob him
Pacquiao did not, but Morales denied him the chance to. Because he declined so early he never gave Pacquiao the opportunity for redemption after the first fight.
You bring up Barreras loss to marquez while he was faded. You are right he was faded. But then you bring up Morales' losses post prime and treat them like they were prime losses. Only man to beat peak Morales is Barrera. And the greatest accomplishment any of the three had was Morales out boxing a young Pacquiao.
Juan Manuel Marquez Pros - Most technical of the three - Gave prime Pacquiao two tough fights Discounts the 3rd fight where Manny was on a tear at 147 and most thought Pacquiao was going to finally get an impressive win over Marquez, this fight was very meaningful, it exposed the "improvements" and showed how great Marquez is - Aged the best - Knocked out Pacquiao, but not the peak Pacquiao Manny was on a long run of wins and nobody thought Bradley won so in reality Manny was at a very high point in his career - Did defeat Barrera, but not the peak Barrera Cons - No signature win, never beat a great fighter at their peak Pacquiao II would have been that win, judges had other ideas - Never fought Morales or Hamed - Norwood loss was bad What do you mean by Barrera was most consistent but Morales was most physically dominant?
Barrera > Morales > Marquez/Roidquez Roidquez was juiced to the max in III and IV. IV should have an asterisk next to it. Roidquez is the A-Roid of Boxing. :verysad This content is protected :deal
Marquez-MAB was only controversial to HBO and the MAB fanboys, the great majority of world scribes had Marquez beating MAB and beating him convincingly.