I prefer Vasquez-Marquez 3. It had a great balance between good, solid technical boxing and loads of action. Sitchatchawal-Monshipour was a great fight but it’s hard to watch - absolutely brutal and zero defense. You can feel two guys beating the primes out of each other in that one. Now, Vasquez and Marquez beat the primes out of each other in their third fight (when combined with the first and second fights as well) but as hard a fight as it was, you didn’t automatically feel that the winner and loser would be ruined. The fact that they were wasn’t as obvious during the fight as it was in Sitchatchawal-Monshipour.
I feel like the fourth fight between Vasquez and Marquez kind of proved that they beat the primes out of each other (specifically Vasquez because he lost his eye in part to how much damage it accumulated from the battles he and Marquez had). Also, it wasn't really necessary because the rivalry had a clear winner is Vasquez. If anything, the fourth fight kind of messed up the legacy of the rivalry.
For me, I prefer the type of fight that Marquez vs Vasquez is. Less above who can mindlessly break the other, and more about skilled aggression. Don't get me wrong, I love a good slugfest, but I think the higher level of skill and cleaner work in Marquez-Vasquez III takes it.
Both bloody great fights but as others have said I think Vazquez vs Marquez 3 was fought at a higher level in terms of skills and technique.
More of these type of threads, please @Marcus S. Funnily enough, I was only just thinking of doing a thread like this yesterday, comparing great fights.
Thanks! I got the idea from the person who made a thread asking which fight was better between Joshua/Klitschko and Fury/Wilder III.