which is a better win: mab to naz or morales to pac?

so?

 

I think Barrera's win over Hamed was a greater achievement than he is given credit for, on account of how Hamed's career died after that fight, but Hamed pre-Barrera was a monster at featherweight, a true KO specialist with a horrible style to try and combat, and Barrera was magnificent to beat him convincingly on the night. And I think Barrera is the pound-for-pound greater boxer than Morales.
However, my opinion is that El Terrible's win over Pac is better. In the run-up to the fight Pac had DEMOLISHED Barrera, and came so so close to stopping Marquez. He was a beast that couldn't be tamed. Morales was INCREDIBLE that night, easily the best performance of his career.
And unlike Hamed, Pacquiao proved after that fight what a feat it had been beating them, as he climbed the top 10 P4P til he was the no1. No-one has beat him since.

 

pac didnt have the same kind of beating that hamed got from barrera. barrera to hamed was a total shutdown while on the other hand, pac was on the game all through out the distance.

 

Barrera beat Hamed
115-112 twice and 116-111.

Morales beat Pacquiao
115-113 three times.


Very, very similar scorecards. Have you watched Barrera-Hamed recently? It was honestly honestly nothing even like a 'total shutdown'. Barrera won convincingly, but he never knocked Hamed down, never had him badly hurt at any point, it was never a Calzaghe v Lacy. It was just one guy controlling the fight by being more active and more aggressive, but Hamed was always there and always dangerous. I kept thinking he was going to turn it into a fight by scoring with one of his lightning lunges. He didn't, but the threat was there throughout, he was never so out of it that it was a 'shutdown'.
Morales was so confident he had won the decision he switched stances in the last round and took needless punishment just to give the fans a thrilling last 3 minutes. It was an unforgettable risk by him v a puncher like Pacquiao. So he did have the fight won by the 12th- mighty impressive if you ask me. He was made to work far harder and dig far deeper than Barrera did v Hamed, and he did that. For all these reasons, I say definitely a better win.

 

thats what i mean by a total shutdown. hamed never even had a single opportunity to deliver his goods and bring the fight to barrera. it was a master craftsman schooling a cocky, very hittable and one-dimentional opponent.

• barrera was the underdog in his fight against hamed. hamed was the established champ and barrera was the one going up in weight.

• morales was the established champ, pac was the one going up and wieght and morales was slightly favored in this fight.

barrera to hamed was an upset. its the better win, imo

 

On both counts, untrue.

Going into the Hamed fight, Barrera was a three-time world super-bantamweight champion with a very good record of 52-3, he had been as high as #3 P4P, and had destroyed the highly rated Kennedy McKinney. Also, he had arguably beaten Erik Morales one year previously (though he didn't get the decision), and Morales was viewed as a better fighter at that time than Hamed. As I remember it, MAB was a slight favourite with many boxing people, though Hamed was a slight favourite with the bookies.

Going into the Pacquiao fight, Pacquiao was a clear favourite. Morales was just coming off losing his last fight to Barrera to lose the trilogy 2-1, and Pacquiao had obliterated Barrera 18 months before, absolutely annihilated him in fact.

Morales-Pac definitely better.