El Terrible. Both great fighters but I feel Erik had a slightly better skillset, and you just had to love his willingness to stand and trade even when he didn't need to.
This doesn't make sense. MAB fought an undefeated Hamed for the lineal FW championship and beat him very convincingly. When Morales fought Pacquiao, MAB was the lineal SFW champion Erik and Pac fought for a regional title. Yes, he beat Pac in a close fight, but that was overshadowed by the two following knockout losses. Still a huge win, but not the same historical significance.
It's gotta be MAB. He wins the trilogy and I see his schooling and humiliation of Naz as a better win than Morales' close decision against Pacman.
Morales for me. I think their trilogy was so close that you have to take other things into account. Think Morales big wins were better than MABs and Morales beat two people that MAB never could. Also think that Morales was unlucky not to get the belt at 135. While it is not a factor in who was the better fighter it should be remembered how El Terrible decided to go out on his shield when he knew he was outgunned by Pac in the 3rd fight. A true warrior! Either way they're very close.
Barrera was the better fighter and the better technician, he proved when they fought over the 3 fights, Morales' record is looking good because he has a win over Pac, but other than that the records are equally good.
I agree 100%. The 2-1 thing goes to peoples heads.... Morales got the better of their H2H IMO tho not by much so I usually class them as even H2H & I think Erik proved more in his career outside their trilogy. As usual, the votes indicate exactly what was shown throughout their careers, there is not a lot between them.... I hate MAB & love Morales but even I will say that anyone who says there is a clear gap between these 2 doesnt know ****... there is a gap, but its small & its in El Terrible`s favour. Botswana :smoke