I keep hearing how Marquez was overlooked and never got his chances and Barrera got all the attention while Marquez was really the better of the 2.Funny cause I seem to remember Marquez getting a title shot in 1999 and blowing it against Norwood.I think Marquez's suffered because he had a bad manager not because everyone was ducking him(except Naseem who I really believe ducked him).
I tend to think they're about even now. Personally I think Marquez is better a fighter but it's tough to match MAB's resume.
MAB is overall a better fighter.JMM is better skillwise but overall MAB has the more complete package.
I wouldn't say hands down. He is a better combination puncher. Both are very accurate. I think he is a smarter fighter than Barrera, he stays calm where Barrera panics when getting beat and resorts to dirty tactics. Marquez has more heart, more power, and yes he might have a better chin, takes body punches better and certainly more stamina than Barrera. I think Barrera had the edge in speed and was a better defensive fighter too.
JMM had all he could handle against a faded MAB, prime for prime MAB does to JMM what Vaz did to his little brother.
If Barrera beats Khan maybe he'll give JMM a shot at his newly aquired WBA INTERNATIONAL lightweight title (made from old bean cans)
What? Break Barrera's nose and stop him. Lose a rematch. Then lose a razor thin decision in a 3rd fight which could have gone either way. Not exactly a major beatdown then.
MAB is the more complete fighter. JMM is a great combination puncher, but so was Barrera, who worked to the body more consistently, naturally, and more effectively more often than not. MAB didn't get hit with big shots as much as JMM has in his career, and his hand speed was blurring at 122 and 126. Marquez is the harder hitter, but MAB is the better overall fighter aswell as having the better overall resume. Don't get infatuated with the now. Both MAB and Morales were every bit as good as JMM.
