I have to go with Morales, Titos best win was a gift for a fight he clearly lost. So you are left with Vargas, Reid, Joppy and a past prime Pernell.
You are cutting Titos career very short. Tito was one of the most dominant welterweights of the last 50 years.
Is it not also true that the general public seem to have accepted that Oscar deserved the victory, and those were the two best Welterweights on the planet at the time? I have to concur with the other poster in saying that in terms of resume, Erik Morales has an edge. That's the most important thing for me when evaluating greatness, and nor do I believe Trinidad to have significant advantage or any advantage at all in terms of ability or longevity.
Hopkins AFRAID of giving him a rematch?:rofl I think he'd be more than happy to cash in on a rematch. Oscar, even with his chicken dance, still boxed the **** out of Tito and Tito's bloodied trunks is proof of that.
Tito's best wins have to be over past his prime Whitaker, he got a gift over Oscar, but everyone else he destroyed. Morales beat a prime ATG in Pac when Erik was NOT in his, so that says alot about Erik and he does have a win over Barrera another ATG. Definitely Morales.
The negotiations for a Hopkins-Trinidad rematch fell apart. Both sides probably just wanted a bigger split of the purse. Hopkins also kept fighting in smaller fights in the next couple of years after beating Trinidad, pricing himself out of fights, probably because he was unhappy with the amount of money Don King was going to take out of the payday. Not too long after splitting from Don King, he got a huge fight with DLH.
bump for the floyd fans who are wondering and complaining why morales is seen by most people as a great fighter and has the same number of votes with floyd even though he has many loses.
Hmmm I voted Trinidad just because his punching power is very highly rated, but on second thought I think Morales is the more complete fighter. I think their resumes are comparable.