Fights where you have to admit that your fav got a shady win.

Addie will love that post Bill!

My answer to the thread-question would not be Pac-Marquez II, which I felt was very close and could've gone either way, and it's understandable that Pac got the nod because he got a good KD.

Mine would be Oscar-Quartey. I was a big Oscar fan then and I was rooting for him all the way, but despite his brilliant last round rally, I still had him down by 2 points overall.

 

The problem with Louis-Walcott I is that people today try applying the ten point must scoring system to their evaluation of the match. But it was judged on a rounds basis, meaning that Jersey Joe only got a round for each of his two knockdowns, not two additional points. Some observers said that Walcott lost the final two rounds by running away, costing him the match.

While I need to review it (and it is now on youtube) I thought at the time that Marcos Geraldo might have decisioned Hagler with neutral judges on neutral turf. In it's own way, Hagler-Geraldo was more troubling to be than Antuofermo-Hagler I or Hagler-Duran, a disturbing precursor to how Marv's career ended.

 

I agree w/ you about Barerra. And I think he tried to get DQ'd against pac when he was getting his ass kicked. He would pull that **** a lot in the fights I saw. I didn't like morales either though. I think BOTH are overrated in the atg category. Give me a Wilfredo Gomez or Salvador Sanchez anyday over these two guys.:blurp

 

Vargas was a joke. And by the way he fought for the goodold USA not Mex. in the Olympics. wasn't he born and raised in the US? He goes on and on about Mexico, yet his life is here in the US which gave him all he has. Why doesn't he live in Mex. if he wants to be considered all Mex. He is no more Mexican that the Tex-Mex. fighters raised in Texas. Cuevas, Zarate, Sanchez, Pintor, Bareera, Morales, Olivares-they are Mexican and should be sickened by Americans like vargas trying to join their ranks yet not living, I believe ever, in Mexico.:-((Just like when Pintor fought Meza and Meza explained that the fans would be for Pintor because Lupe was raised in Cajamalpa in Mexico City and was a Mexican's Mexican. Also about Vargas, he along with Judah, was one of the Tyson alcolites who talked real tough, but just like their boy, when the going got tough, they were not tough enough and folded under pressure. Frontrunners all!

 

From a technical standpoint, as much of a brawl as it was, it was fought at the highest of elite levels and, brilliant execution of skills on both accounts. Barrera boxed beautifully. Relentless, savage, yes. Nevertheless beautiful technique and boxing ability. I despise Barrera because he always comes off as an absolute ****. Top that off with Erik Morales being one of my favorite fighters to watch. It is what it is.:yep

 

Yeah thanks I forgot about that:good. I haven't seen Geraldo-Hagler but Antuofermo-Hagler 1 was tougher to score than people make it out to be because of all the rough-housing.thumbsup

 

You KNEW I was going to read this and reiterate what I always do you dumb Scot.

Mckinney was getting in Marco's face talkin' ****. Marco was being respectful, but once that line is crossed, he'll hit you in the face.

You also conveniently left out why Marco hit Morales too. Do you think he did it for no reason. No, Morales was also talkin' **** to Marco and if someone talks **** to you on the street, what do you do?

Nice guy smile is genuine, the only real legitimate reason for your dislike for Marco is because he overshadowed Erik Morales. No more, no less.

I won't list Barrera vs Morales II as a shady decision because I don't think it was one. Morales didn't outbox nobody, his performance was just made more than what it was because he went into the fight as the underdog so would have been the moral victor. I had Marco 1 point up, and so does many other posters.

I don't think Barrera had one shady decision in his career, actually. I thought he beat Juarez close but clear in the first fight, also. Don't know where the close scorecards came from.

 

Show me one example, and I mean just one example, of a poster on ESB with even an ounce of credit who attempts to put Barrera and Morales in the same league as those two you've just mentioned. Both Marco and Erik score highly in every category when considering what makes an all-time great. They may not be to your favor, but they are both legitimate great fighters who gave everything they had to the sport, fighting the best in every division they campaigned in.

 

It's a myth that the second MAB-Morales fight was a clear win for Morales, because time has obscured how the fight went because it seems a natural balancing act to say the 2nd was a clear win for Morales on account of the first being a clear win for Barrera. The 2nd fight could have gone either way. The first and third couldn't. I defy anyone to produce scorecards that tally showing Morales as the overall victor of the trilogy, because it can't be done with any legitimacy.

 

I'll be honest, Bill. I went into watching the second fight for the first time worried. I wasn't looking forward to it because the overwhelming feeling has always been that Erik deserved the decision. I was shocked when I got into the 7th round with the fight damn near even, because it's also common knowledge that Marco's best part of the fight came in the latter stages. I felt Marco deserved to win based on his dominant 12th round performance, and Morales was never really boxing effectively, and neither was Marco, they were both hesitating to engage, giving neither fighter a clear edge.

...I don't know where Bill get this "boxing lesson" from. :huh

 

This is the internet buddy, nobody has an ounce of credibility. Every self proclaimed expert on here(and i've seen claims of esb classic posters having superior knowledge to any credible historian/expert - see Gods of War thread) is nothing more than an anonymous nostalgic nuthugger with a god complex.

Sanchez(RIP) was a phenom, but his ATGness was unfulfilled(due to saddening circumstances). Its unfair to discredit two ATG, accomplished warriors, just because they were born after the old timers. In a P4P sense, Gomez maybe above them, but both would outclass him if they were to meet, in my opinion.

When two fighters, the two best of their time, in their primes, go to war and are increbidly evenly match and keep it up the whole distance of the fight, 3 times. I think it speaks volumes about their greatness. And these two fighters are vastly underrated on this forum.

 

Gomez isn't being outclassed by Barrera and Morales, but I do agree that both of them are underrated on this forum. What more can fighters do other than fight the best fighters of their generation in three seperate weight divisions and coming out on top more often than not over a 20 year career? ...Boggles the mind.

 

1. Barrera never overshadowed Morales (only in your own head), they lived side by side which I thought always flattered Barrera, personally.

2. Barrera had a few shady decisions, the 1st Juarez fight could have gone either way, as could the 3rd Morales fight & he outright lost the 2nd Morales fight, I dont now what fkn fight you were actually watching when you claim you seen their 2nd fight.

3. He`s a dirty fighter that cant take a fair ass whuppin & you know its true.

4. Thats all !

:smoke

 

You keep saying boxing lesson, I never said that.... I said he outboxed him for large parts of the fight & stayed right there with Barrera even when Barrera was having his best moments.

Anyone that scores that 2nd fight for MAB or even a draw should to quote you Addie `take up golf`