Barrera and Morales - P4P

the only question i think i can answer is the power question and the technical question,

morales was said by wayne mccoulugh to have the most heavy hands of anyone he fought (including hamed)

and paulie ayala said morales hits harder then barrera.

i think barrera is much more technically sound, but by choice. morales could be a pot shotting genius (at least imho) but he pushes the envelope in many of his fights taking chances that his pedegree is much finer then. barrera has much more patience and is more versitile i think, he was able to do so much better against junior jones and manny pacquiao in ther rematches.

 

I rank Morales ahead in the ATG list.
And the Pacquiao I fight was just one of the best I ever seen and Erik won in a close fight, which was, in my opinion, the greatest win.

Plus, he also beat couple of opponent Barrera couldn't. So yeah, Morales is slightly ahead.

 

Morales is the weakest hitter out of Hamed, Barrera, Pacman without a doubt. Firstly Hamed KO'd Angeles in 2 who went 12 with Morales, he ko'd another 2 opponents faster than Morales. Pacman KO'd Barrera something Morales wasnt close to doing.

Barrera showed he was a bigger hitter than Morales in their fights despite been outweighed on fight night he hurt Morales numerous times putting Morales on the verge and constantly retreating, Morales never did the same to Barrera. Who knows why Ayala said Morales hits harder when Barrera stopped him and Morales couldnt?

Technically Barrera is better but Morales is height/reach and ability to fight at range are his definate plus points

Both were a little ruined by their first fight imo

 

Firstly head 2 head, Barrera completely owns the head to head. In the first I had it 8-4 or 9-3 plus the knockdown which was legit, the second I had it 6-6, the third I had 8-4 Barrera

Second legacy outside of head to head:

Barrera - Hamed (prime A Class), Mkkinney (prime A Class)), Tapia (old/small), Ayala (small), Jimenez (b lass), Juarez (b class), Peden (b class), Kelley (old)

Morales - Pacquaio (prime A Class), Jones (past prime after the hard Barrera fights and after he lost to Mkkinney A- Class), Zaragoza (V old), Ayala (small), McColough (small b class), Chavez (b class), Kelley (Old),

The Hamed win was monumental for Barrera, as was the Morales robbery in the first fight. THe Mkkinney win put Barrera as the number 1 super bantam until he lost. Mkkinney then beat Jones who beat Barrera and Morales also beat Junior Jones but only after Mkkinney had done the same. Morales best wins are Pacquaio and Jones, Barrera's are Hamed, the Morales trilogy and Mkkinney.

Outside of head to head the top wins are very close but because Barrera won the trilogy and should have perhaps won all 3 gives him the greater legacy

 

Two of my all-time favourites. A very tough choice.

However, I rank Barrera slightly higher p4p. Whenever I have 2 guys close, I always use h2h to decide who should be higher, I think that's the fairest way, and although the trilogy was very close, I think Barrera proved in the last fight that he was very narrowly but still clearly the better fighter over the 3 fights.

Morales scored a better win than any on Barrera's record IMO (over Pacquiao), but Barrera's win over Hamed was superb as well.

Both had some poor losses on their records,
Barrera: Jones x 2,
Morales: Zahir Raheem
(I don't count the Marquez & Pac losses as disappointing for Barrera due to the quality of opposition, and don't count Morales's losses to Pac for the same reasons, and don't count the Diaz loss as El Terrible was pretty much shot by the time of the 3rd Pac fight)

Both had wins over genuine quality opposition,
Barrera: McKinney, Tapia, Kelley, Ayala, Peden, Juarez
Morales: Jones, Kelley, Chi, Ayala, Chavez, Hernandez

As I said, it's so close between them, but I give the edge to Barrera.

 

I rate Barrera slightly higher he did win the trilogy.

 

Ive ALWAYS felt that Erik Morales was a better fighter than Marco Antonio Barrera.

**** those blind judges. I thought EM edged out MAB in their 1st classic by winning rds 3,4,5,6,7,9 & 10... rd 11 was even (The knockdown was a complete farce, the punch by Barrera didt even land.)
2nd fight was WELL WON by Morales, he took rds 1,2,4,5,7,8,10 & 11... rd 3 was even & EM was denied a legite Knockdown in rd 7 (body shot) Disgusting robbery in order to make a 3rd fight (Marco`s crying after their 1st fight didnt exactly go un-noticed by the judges either)
3rd fight was a draw but if anyone deserved it, maybe MAB did, I gave Morales rds 2,4,7,8,11 & 12 in the 3rd fight with no even rds.

EM also has wins over Pac & Jones who both beat Barrera TWICE.

Barrera has never beaten ANYBODY that Id make favourite over Morales.

Open your eyes, not only was Morales the better warrior, more entertaining, with a stronger heart & chin but he was better at plain boxing, just check out fight 2 when he doesnt let MAB inside as often.

Barrera had the better longevity mainly because he was highly negative & **** to watch in a lot of his later bouts but Morales is better than Barrera in their primes. Ive no doubt.

 

Outside the trilogy I think their career achievements are closely alligned, too close to call IMO. In that case I have to fall back on the head-2-head, and thats why have Barrera slightly ahead. Barrera's 2-1 advantage in the trilogy gives him a close but distinct edge.

 

I haven't really though about a specific placing for them, i would have morales slightly ahead though and probably both in my top 60ish all time

 

Before we begin, Id just like to say... lets all laugh at rangers ... now to the boxing.....

Someone with a bit of sense, having Morales ahead of Barrera.
Of all the fighters Ive seen enough footage of, I would have to say I would rank both EM & MAB much higher than 60, although if Id seen every boxer in history, something tells me 60ish would be about right but as it is, top 30 for me & top 10 of all the fighters that had their primes under LWT.

I believe Barrera was the best that he could ever have been where as Im quite sure that if Morales didnt like to make things exciting & hard for himself by slugging & stuck to his strengths (long range boxing) then his ATG ranking would ALWAYS be higher than MABs & he would be looking at a top 25 ATG p4p ranking.
Morales himself cares more about being remembered as the guy who gave the best fights than he does about being the guy who was the best boxer.

Barrera`s attributes & skillset combined with Morales mentality wouldnt be half as good a fighter as vice versa - something to think about.

Ps. Morales, for me, should at least win `most exciting fighter of the decade` (not sure if this vote is official, I heard Hearns won it for the 80s.)

:thumbsup

 

i think its fair to say that they where both hurtin each other, moralas even scored a unofficial knockdown with a straight right hand to the body in their second fight.

i can understand that barrera is the stronger of the two, which could be why morales was constantly retreating. that could also be a variable for why ayala was stopped by barrera and not by morales.
but for power i read wayne mccoulughs biography, he says that morales was the hardest puncher he faced, harder then hammed.