overated wins..

Actually I do think it's Barrera's best win and maybe his best performance. I'm more inclined to say his first fight against Morales was his best performance, but he didn't get the victory and the next two fights were very boring in comparison.

This victory isn't considered great because of the opponent, but because of the level of skill he displayed.

Hamed was the best fighter at 126 at the time, top 10 p4p, and considered the only likely threat to Mayweather at the time. Barrera was already considered semi-washed up, and the true winner of the Morales fight. Hamed was ranked higher than Morales at the time.

Hamed showed some real inconsistencies in his skill set and chin, but the one thing he had was real gruesome power when fighters attacked him. If Kelley stayed on task to outbox Hamed rather than get drawn into a fire fight, he probably would have won as well.

Barrera was known as a brawler and was hyping the fight on the fact that he was going to pressure Hamed like no one had before. He wasn't known for outboxing other fighters and no one had seen him fight that way until this fight. This change up in strategy is generally attributed to him getting older and ring worn. He put on a magnificent display of out fighting and embarrassed Hamed so bad, it was inconceivable at the time.

I actually never thought much of Hamed, but he was highly ranked at the time and presented some difficult attributes to overcome. In hindsight, his wins over Morales are probably better, but the win is considered great because of boxing public, and "expert" opinion of the time.

 

Hagler over Mugabi
Hopkins over Echols

 

I respect your opinion, but Erik Morales in '04 was a better fighter than any version of Hamed. Consider the two things. Barrera was moving up to an unknown weight and yet won the fight relatively clearly in the majority's eyes. Also, Morales would beat Manny Pacquiao next time out. He was far from being a shot item. Barrera's best career performance, and his best career win, in my opinion. Excitement has little to do with it.

In order to defeat a higher level of fighter in Morales in '04, he had to show a higher level of skill.

Alternatively, Hamed went life and death with Augie Sanchez prior to the Barrera fight and was exposed as a flawed talent as a result. The rankings obviously mean nothing. Morales had fought better fighters by that time and he had defeated better fighters. Hamed was an overrated comodity.

Hamed's single punch power was also overstated. He didn't knockout one great fighter in his entire career. The only real iron chinned fighter he fought was Wayne McCullough, and he had no problem going the full 12.

It was only inconceivable to those who didn't know much about either fighter at the time. Marco Antonio Barrera showed exceptional Boxing ability in his fight with Jesus Salud, and had actually adopted a more calculated approach in the Jones rematch some years before. As Lampley put it, "it's not like Mike Tyson became Chris Byrd".

The Hamed win was a great one, I haven't denied that, but I hold his victory over Morales in '04 in higher regard. Barrera was perceived to have been finished, or at least no longer on Morales level, and on top of that he was fighting at a new weight against a far greater fighter than Hamed. The idea that Morales was shopworn and finished was totally erased when he went on to beat Manny Pacquiao in impressive fashion a year later.

It's fairly straight forward. Morales was better than Hamed. It's a better win, and I think he had to perform at a higher level to get the job done.

 

Hagler over Mugabi
Hopkins over Echols

 

Can you explain the reasoning behind your choices please.

 

Larry Holmes over Butterbean

 

Donaire KO Montiel. After that win Donaire went from not being in the top 10 p4p to jumping over JMM to the #3 spot, if thats not an overrated win then I don't know what is.

 

holmes over ali
lewis over tyson
vitali over briggs
vitali over adamak
tyson over m frazier

 

This content is protected

 

Hopkins over Trinidad !!

 

I think Hopkin's success over the past few years have actually made that win underrated, but it was still a past prime Hopkins no matter how you look at it

 

Manny over Oscar. Manny over Clottey. Manny over Margarito. Manny over Mosley. Manny's the most over hyped bum on PED's. Give any joe schmoe that can't fight worth **** a bunch of drugs and 12 years to get it right, and they too can become a celebrated champion. With PED's, all things are possible. Pacquiao's a cheater.

 

Joe Calzaghe vs Chris Eubank is far and away the best example of this I can think of.

 

not at all. a very good win for mayweather at that time.

Pacquiao vs Clottey and Pacquiao vs Barrerra(the last one) were overrated.

 

De la Hoya isn't on Jones' and Whitaker's level in greatness.