DID BARRERA make a good account of himself??

pac should not try to box jmm. there's no chance he'd win. jmm is just too smart. pac should go out smoking like he did the first time and hope that jmm stays down after the intial blitz. if not, pac will be in for a long night again.

 

I was thinking the other way when I wrote my post.
I was thinking here we are talking about a JMM-Pac fight coming to realization, as if Rocky Juarez is a forgone conclusion.

I got to say that on paper, the Juarez fight should'nt be that much of a problem for Marquez, but having said that.....Juarez is no pushover and will probably be in the best shape of his life. Marquez still has to get himself in great shape and go out and execute.

Thank God, Marquez has a diciplined trainer in Nacho Beristein that dots his i's and crosses his t's!
.....so Marquez looking past Juarez and to a Pac fight are less likely with Beristein in his corner!

 

He chose to live on his knees rather than die on his feet. Or, rather, he chose to take it easy on his feet rather than take a chance of getting laid out on his back.

It was sort of like Holmes vs Holyfield or Roy Jones Jnr. vs Tarver III: an old champion preferring to win a few rounds and not get hit too much rather than try to actually win. In many ways, it would have been better to see Barrera go out on his shield rather than holding and running in fear of Pac-Man.

 

I thought it was close, where the judges got such a big margin from i dont know .... so to answer your question, yes, he gave a good account of himself.

 

I agree, I think there's something to be admired by a fighter who goes out on his shield, making his conqueror have to earn it and not just handed to him!

 

most posters here gave mab 2 to 4 rounds. with two of those could have gone either way so the 10-2 for pac isn't really something to complain about. even MAB didn't say anything about the scoring

 

call it pride. if there was ever a thing called "running with machismo" mab shoowed it that night.

 

I suppose, to continue the Holyfield-orientated examples, George Foreman against Holyfield was an example of a veteran losing with his pride intact. No-one could fault Foreman's courage or toughness that night. Chris Eubank's last hurrahs against Carl Thompson were also proud performances that I'm sure Eubank doesn't regret. Will Barrera regret his fight against Pacquiao? I'm sure of it.

I didn't see any machismo from Barrera, or any pride. He was more Larry Holmes than George Foreman that night: not once did he take the attitude that "Either he loses or he goes through hell."

 

what i mean of "running with machismo" is that he runs too much in the ring and not engaging too much. i then linked it to divac's statement that mab did not let pac" destroy him that much" by pulling off too much, boxing off too much or running away. that's why there is machismo in a way there, as he only planned to survive in the latter rounds coz his pride did not want himself 2 be ktfo again by pac....

 

Avoiding getting ktfo by not trying to win is in no way macho. Now, if he'd jumped on Pac from the start, used lateral movement, mixed in some boxing, and just gone all out to try and disrupt Pac's rhythm, THAT'D be what I'd call "running with machismo".

There's nothing proud about doing a Tony Tucker (winning a few rounds, but generally just trying to go the distance against a superior opponent). There's a lot of pride in doing a Chris Eubank: when outmatched, doing everything you can to win and be willing to go through inhuman pain to try and win. That way, you either win a historic victory or go out with people cheering your name.

Let's face it: Barrera may as well have not fought Pacquiao. At BEST, it did nothing for his legacy, and at worst, it hampered it a bit.

 

Here is what I don't get ,in order for MAB to get respect he should of just brawled with the much younger and stronger fighter ?I'm sure glad some of you don't work the corners of some of these fighters .But here is another thing I don't get JT just brawled with Pavlik and got Knocked out the 1st thing I read is that he was exposed !

I love it how peopele can scritinize a fighter who' s been in classic wars and is a lock for the hof but now his legacy is a little tarnished becuase he tried to out box a guy who most people can't out brawl !! No wonder boxing as a whole will never get the real respect it deserves becuase boxing fans are flip floppers ..:think

 

If you dont get it, maybe you dont want to get it Imperial......

......what MAB did for the first 6 rounds was fine, he moved away from Pac, but also in various instances planted his feet and actually went foward to disrupt Pac, then went on to moving away and away from Pac's left.
The spurts of planting his feet and forcing Pac to retreat, was exactly MAB trying to win the round.
You have to show effective punching in a round to merit the round.
MAB at the very least did that through the first half of the fight.

The second half saw Pac solve what MAB was trying to do, he started hitting MAB cleaner and harder, and Barrera for his part wanted none of it and did'nt even try to change the course of which Pac had changed.

......once MAB tasted some clean hard shots from Pac, MAB's burst of energy that he had shown through the first 6 rounds seized, he essentially quit at that point trying to win the fight.

I cant put it any more bluntly except to say that there was a point early in the second half of the fight that MAB just outright and quit!


Now that I have had time to really think about it, yes, Marco Antonio Barrera did exactly that.......He QUIT!!!!!!!

 

All I expected was for MAB to be MAB. He disappointed me in that respect.

That's because this site is full of hypocrites. I never criticised Taylor for trading; in fact, I felt he needed to pucker up for once and take the fight to Pavlik to win. As with Barrera, his only shot was to try to knock Pavlik out.

I often get into debates with "boxing fans". I always win too.

 

at a point in the second half of the fight MAB had to know he was well behind on points and should have gone for broke . . . he ran against Juarez in the rematch and he went out in maybe his last fight with a wimper. Kinda sad, but having said that if I had a vote he would still be a first ballot HOF'er for obvious reasons.

 

Without a doubt Marco is a first ballot HOF'er!

I wont dare hold this performance against him after all the quality performances he gave out.

In a way I can understand MAB's psyche for this fight and the way he preffered to survive after the beating he took a few years back against Pac.
......but facts are facts, and we should tell it like it is. MAB did'nt fight a great fight or did just great just to go the distance.
The facts are that he let the memory of his past fight dictate his effort in this fight, and as a result, did'nt give a full Marco Antonio Barrera effort.
Its as plain as day to see!


.....but believe me, I'm not going to remember MAB for his last fight with Pac.
No question, in the future when the name Barrera is mentioned, the first thing that will pop into my head is his classic trilogy with Morales.
Nothing will ever erase the memory of those great fights!