BoxRec

How great do you all consider Erik Morales?

Is he an all time great? I don't see him on very many p4p lists but I definitely believe he was one of the greatest fighters of all time.

To me, "one of the greatest fighters of all-time" makes me think of a class which precludes the likes of Morales --- perhaps the top twenty or thirty best ever to lace 'em up. It's a subjective term, obviously, but that's what it means to me, & you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone who would put Morales in that company.

I prefer to rank the greats within their own natural weightclasses. Morales has greatness stamped on him in that regard.

I would consider Erik Morales an all-time great, which by my definition equates to belonging in the top 30-40 fighters of all time in his weight class(es) (122-126), perhaps even higher but I'd have to compile a list of fighters first.

I agree with GI . . one of the greatest fighters PFP 'ever'?? That to me would be the PFP best ever top 25-30 and he doesn't make that cut.

Better than Barrera?

Grimm wrote:Better than Barrera?

I can't speak for Demps, but I would lean toward no. It's close on all fronts, but I thought Barrera won two of their three, & has a somewhat better resume overall.

Grimm wrote:Better than Barrera?

I say yes. I had their series split evenly (Barrera the 1st one, Morales the rematch, and their third a draw) but Morales has the overall better resume. Doesn't have the losses to Jones, himself knocked out Jones, Kelley, Espadas Jr, Chi, Ayala, Chavez, McCullough etc. The biggest name MAB beat that Erik didn't was Hamed, but Erik has that now very big win over Pacquao, which gives him the decisive edge.

I think he was slightly better than barrera. But they are pretty much a stalemate. Erik certainly would make my top100 and a top 5 alltime Mexican. Greater than Chavez imo.

def greater than chavez. not a true all time great, though looks good just below that elite

No, he was not even great like if you say Sugar Ray Leonard...Now, Leonard...That was great!!!

harrygreb wrote:def greater than chavez. not a true all time great, though looks good just below that elite

Greater than Chavez??? Yes, he was better than Julio Cesar Chavez, Jr., you meant, right?

I also think he falls short of Chavez's greatness.

a point that is worth making i think, is that Morales' victory over Pacquiao just keeps looking better and better with hindsight

and also, with hindsight, you can visibly see terrible's punch resistance fading and his legs going, in the final roounds of the first fight, IMO

JCC>morales>barrera in my opinion im ranking JCC ahead because of his popularity and that win streak

Counter-puncher wrote:a point that is worth making i think, is that Morales' victory over Pacquiao just keeps looking better and better with hindsight

and also, with hindsight, you can visibly see terrible's punch resistance fading and his legs going, in the final roounds of the first fight, IMO

Don't lose sight of the fact Pacquiao wasn't as good when losing to Morales as he is today. The improvement is not insignificant. Agreed, though, that it is being enhanced with time --- just want to make a note of caution for people with it.

Erik Morales is an all-time great... But I would rate him below Barrera and Pacman.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:a point that is worth making i think, is that Morales' victory over Pacquiao just keeps looking better and better with hindsight

and also, with hindsight, you can visibly see terrible's punch resistance fading and his legs going, in the final roounds of the first fight, IMO

Don't lose sight of the fact Pacquiao wasn't as good when losing to Morales as he is today. The improvement is not insignificant. Agreed, though, that it is being enhanced with time --- just want to make a note of caution for people with it.

oh, for sure.

Pac is better now, which does qualify Morales' win. somewhat.

however if you factor in (1) Morales' long career beforehand (ie how close he was to becoming shot) and (2) manny's since-proven ability to operate at a MUCH higher weight than Morales ('naturally bigger man' or at least able to function as one in the ring) - i think those factors at least balance and offset your proviso, a little? if you know what i mean?

More than a little, & Morales' win, as stated, is enhancing with time. It's not insignificant to note that is (& now, will be) the only defeat Pacquiao has suffered this decade.

I am seeing Pacquiao's recent success boosting Morales a little too high on a few boards though. Was just thinking out loud

Goodnight, Irene wrote:
I am seeing Pacquiao's recent success boosting Morales a little too high on a few boards though. Was just thinking out loud

my first thought with each of pac's last 3 fights has been to think that both Morales and JMM are slightly elevated, retrospectively, by them

Morales' chin, in particular, though always fabled, seems almost otherworldly, rewatching the first fight vs Pac, and realising this is a big-punching fricken WELTERWEIGHT he's taking shots from (and taking them brilliantly, at that).

all of a creeping sudden, JMM's chin seems pretty strong, too.

What happened to Morales' planned comeback?

Rocky Balboa wrote:What happened to Morales' planned comeback?

Hopefully filed away under the "Things that will only end badly" category.

I had the pleasure of seeing his final fight in person against David Diaz, and even though I thought he deserved the nod in that one, going life and death with someone of David Diaz's ilk was a clear indicator of the need to hang em up. Morales is not going to make many P4P all time lists, but he's a legend, and sometimes that's more important.

in my humble chavez is over-rated.

I don’t think Morales makes that top 5 p4p out of Mexico.

JC Chavez, Salvador Sanchez, Ruben Olivares, Carlos Zarate, Vicente Salvidar, and Ricardo Lopez may have something to say about that. Top 10 yes, but not top 5 imo.

Idisagree wrote:I don’t think Morales makes that top 5 p4p out of Mexico.

JC Chavez, Salvador Sanchez, Ruben Olivares, Carlos Zarate, Vicente Salvidar, and Ricardo Lopez may have something to say about that. Top 10 yes, but not top 5 imo.

Agreed. Barrera, too.

Chavez wouldn't make my top 5 and Lopez might not make the top 10. I don't see any case for Ricardo in the top 5. Humberto & canto rank higher imo.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Chavez wouldn't make my top 5 and Lopez might not make the top 10. I don't see any case for Ricardo in the top 5. Humberto & canto rank higher imo.

I could see your point for Humberto Gonzalez but no way Ricardo Lopez should be ranked below Miguel Canto imo. Ricardo Lopez fought everyone at minimum weight and unify all the titles, what else can you ask from him. I would rank Gonzalez one slot below Lopez. Gonzalez was excellent and an exciting fighters but so was Lopez.

Sorry to ask but why you don't post your top ten to see who you rank ahead of Lopez. He doesn't make my top 5 but he does make my top ten.