Erik Morales. Manny Pacquiao (has to fight at 135). Juan Manuel Marquez (has to fight at 135). Joel Casamayor. Marco Antonio Barrera (never fought at 135) Who else?
I would not put Casamayor in the group with those other four. Casamayor is a Junior Lightweight / Lightweight fighter, while the rest started in much lower weight classes. Pacquiao even started at 105. I would put them like this: 1. Barrera (very complete resume, beat Morales in the trilogy) 2. Pacquiao (has the best wins, but the rest of his resume lacks some substance; this is very close). 3. Morales (incredible resume, very close to the guys above, but I rank him third because he lost the trilogy with Barrera). 4. Marquez (his resume is much inferior than the rest). If I had to rank Casamayor in this group, I'd put him at #5. I'd prefer to compare Casamayor to guys like Mayweather, Castillo, Corrales and Freitas.
I agree with Asterion and if Hamed fits in (close to the age of MAB, Terrible, Dinamita) he's in for the 4th place for me. JMM is truly a great fighter, it's shame that he didn't get AT LEAST ONE decision against PAC and that the Morales/Hamed fighter never happened... But you can't do much about that... 1. MAB 2. PacMan and Morales (he met Pac at the end of his career however he was extremly good as a SBW and FW - I can's say Pac has done more or better...) 4. Hamed 5. JMM
Why Morales above Barrera? I am always befuddled when trying to rate those two. I think Morales was the better fighter actually, but Barrera did take 2 out of 3. But maybe Morales's win over Pac is the deciding factor, but then you have Marco's win over Naz. atsch :huh
I always felt that Morales won fights I and II vs Barrera. I also felt like Morales was the better fighter against other opponents as well.
Im a big time Barrera fan but still what did Morales ever do at 135? I know he lost to Zahir Raheem the first time and David Diaz the second, right? If Pac does good at 135 i'll say him, then Barrera, then Marquez.
