How good was a prime Erik Morales?

he wasn't good, he was great.

 

nah I never meant that to be silly, I mean it sincerely, Erik Morales is an atg. Not as technically good as Wilfredo Gomez but at 122 he was a bit of a phenom. I thought he lost to Barrera but won the rematch at 126 personally. In his prime I remember just knowing he was going to win all of his fights (which is why it blew my mind when he started to lose, after the Raheem fight), except for when he fought Barrera, who just had that fire in him when it came to fighting Morales. I never had the same confidence in Barrera when he came up against all of his opponents though, and Barrera was my favourite fighter back then. I remember picking Morales over Pacquiao no issue the first time they fought, a great great win which is very underrated these days because of the bogus claims of Pacquiao improving and becoming the new Willie Pep over night. Even if his technical improvements are true to an extent (which I agree, TO AN EXTENT) Morales holds a win over him, and it should never be discredited. That win stands the test of time.

 

He was a destroyer at 122lbs especially. Anyone in history would have to dig very deep inside themselves to win a victory over a peak Erik Morales, and there arent too many i'd favour

 

yeah, my post consolidated, good post.

 

As ive said before, the 1st Pacquiao, he gave all he had left to win that fight, over the guy who had just dominated his long time rival Barrera. Incredible victory.

 

yeah, good post

 

no problem, my bad actually.

What is guaranteed in Morales-JMM is a classic, **** me, a CLASSIC war. JMM's weakness is footwork imo, lateral movement, but you have to be very very good in that department to expose that weakness, a pure boxer like Chris John on paper has the beating of JMM, but that never happened because JMM was just betetr than him (the decision was **** imo). If you engage JMM you're catching full combos clean, his combos are no joke. And Morales, as we all know, engages you and then some, although he does actually have boxing ability, which he exhibited in Barrera in the featherweight bout. Would Morales overwhelm him though? Maybe this could be that exact same thing happning unto Marquez this time, meaning even though Marquez matches up well stylistically it just doesn't happen for him. As I said, when Morales was in his prime I always was confident he would win, except when he fought Barrera each time, so i have to say that although we're doing this in hindsight, if the fight were being made tomorrow and these were prime, I would probably bet on Morales, it's just the way it was.

 

Morales is probably the one recent modern great i've never been a fan or advocate of at any point throughout his career, yet have always still seen as a very good fighter.

I think it was me getting quickly sick and tired of being told what a great textbook boxer-puncher this man was supposed to be...then watching him get flush punches bounced off his face by the dozen in nearly every round of slop filled fight after slop filled fight..Then the truly great fight with Barrera happens and that's it as far as being allowed to achnowledge that hey, this guy is pretty ****ing flawed in a lot of ways.

90% of fighters around 118 to 126 that want to fight a flat footed aggressive fight, with mostly straight line pressure, slugging or even cultured punching(ie Barrera) are going to have a tough night with Erik.He's not a man you want to simply try and punch holes through.

A great chin and willpower with good size, power and solid physical ability allied to strong stamina and a pretty good long straight punching arsenal make him formidable for fighters with those styles.

However he also usually traded far too much on that chin and will at the expense of his technical skills for my liking.The chin and general toughness really are key for him....Morales with the same mindset and skillset yet the durability of a typical world level fighter would drop off in effectiveness a lot more than a great many other great/excellent fighters would if you likewise handicapped them in durability.

Why does that even matter you mgiht ask?He DID have that durability needed to fight that way and was successful against top fighters doing so.And i wouldn't disagree, as i said for fighters of a certain style Morales is tough stuff.

But what about the more patient and versatile top fighters who can move well laterally from 118 to 126, there are a lot of them and i think many would be too savvy, technical and in-control of themselves for the often too angry and technically sloppy, defensively unfocused Morales...not necessarily easy fights, but fig.I don't see him as enough of a physical force, nor a good enough boxer-puncher to be placed on so high a pedastal as he is and he's hardly a chessmatch kind of guy either.
I can't see him faring well against the better(or even just Vilomar Fernandez type level)cuties, and mobile stylists of his divisions...his footwork was never good when he had movement given(and he never really fought any genuinely good ones)or was forced onto the frontfoot.Far better when he could plant and bounce forward with the lead right against an oncoming or static fighter.

The other thing-getting away from opinions on how he might do against other notables, is i don't agree with the opinion he and Barrera have amassed great records.They are good, but Morales' especially is too top-heavy to be great.It's all about Barrera and Pac in the end, with a lot of the better ones outside them being faded or ancient...the likes of McCullough and Ayala were decent, but overhyped after a win or two, never that talented and always the type of workmanlike, light hitting aggressor Morales could coast with.He was quite fortunate in the styles of fighter he came up against, the type made for a fighter of his durability and skillset, but he still often looked underwhelming to me against them.

In the end it's not the record though; it's good enough and there are fighters who i rate higher with lesser ones or similar problems(Chang's is similarly top heavy for instance and would keep him out of most top 50-75s)...it's just him never really doing it for me as a fighter.Always very good and with a genuinely great win against Pac(though the fight is an overrated sloppy mess) but never an original 8 weightclass top ten or top 50-75 all-time fighter for me.

Too many more formidable looking fighters with great wins of their own for that, yo'.

 

A much better boxer than I originally thought him to be when I first started watching him against the likes of McCullough and Barrera(first fight).Before the rematch with Barrera and his fight with Ayala,I didn't think he was all that impressive beside having a chin,alot of heart and being pretty exciting to watch.And I didn't(and still don't)think he was ever the puncher he was made out to be.Good power,but not of the devestating type - quite similar to Gomez in that regard.



Morales,when discplined and completely focused,is when he is at his best.He never threw the spectactular looking combinations that Barrera and Marquez did,but he was just as,if not,arguably even more,technically sound than both.A good punch variety,good body puncher,a very good jab when he chose to really commit to it,and he always did an excellent job at feinting with the left to set up his right hand.A pretty versatile boxer,basically




His best performance - one that truly captures his boxing ability,versatility and him at the absolute peak of his powers - would be,I say,against Paulie Ayala.Not only did he showcase his full arsenal,he also demonstrated a very good defense,excellent counter punching,and the ability to fight off the ropes effectively.One of those rare instances where he was able to mesh together both offense and defense so smoothly.Excellent performance in a one-sided,but exciting fight.




Yes,he was great.

 

High standards it is then. There has to be many many 'greats' excluded from consideration on this basis then I'd say (if we're being consistent) unless we're just going to class it under what you admitted to, that he never really did it for you as a fighter. If we're going to put it under that banner (which equates to preference), then he seems to have 'done it' for everybody else.

 

To me Morales is being more appreciated in retrospect...and he deserves it.

He should be ranked along side Marco Antonio Barerra.

 

Morales is an excellent fighter that benefits from Bob Arum's careful match making and not being in the spot light somewhat. Because he and the divisions he fought in weren't in the spotlight it's easy to pretend he fought a who's who of the divisions he fought in, MAB/Pac aside he didn't