BoxRec

Who turned out to be the more impressive boxer of the two ?

Barrera, not only did he outdo Morales in their trilogy but he had a much longer career as a top fighter.

Barrera

gotta go with Barrea he went 2-1 against Morales and the win over Hamed was huge at the time.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:Barrera, not only did he outdo Morales in their trilogy but he had a much longer career as a top fighter.

Bang-on.

I disagree.

I personally had their trilogy 1-1-1, the rubber match being a draw (HBO's rooting and bias in favor of MAB was sickening)

Morales beat Junior Jones, McCullough, Chi, Ayala Hernandez, Chavez, and Pacquiao.

Barrera beat Hamed, Ayala, an older Kelley, lost twice to Junior Jones, lost twice to Pacquiao.


Morales has the better resume and in his prime IMO was the better fighter. I think some are swayed by HBO's love affair with MAB that existed the past few years. Barrera was slicker boxing wise but Morales's boxing ability is under-rated, and he was also the bigger hitter/more durable.

dempseyfire wrote:I disagree.

I personally had their trilogy 1-1-1, the rubber match being a draw (HBO's rooting and bias in favor of MAB was sickening)

Morales beat Junior Jones, McCullough, Chi, Ayala Hernandez, Chavez, and Pacquiao.

Barrera beat Hamed, Ayala, an older Kelley, lost twice to Junior Jones, lost twice to Pacquiao.


Morales has the better resume and in his prime IMO was the better fighter. I think some are swayed by HBO's love affair with MAB that existed the past few years. Barrera was slicker boxing wise but Morales's boxing ability is under-rated, and he was also the bigger hitter/more durable.

WoW you really didnt do these 2 fellas resumes justice.

Barrera's Top 10
1. Marales II
2. Hamed
3. McKinney
4. Morales III
5. Ayala
6. Kelley
7. Tapia
8. Juarez II
9. Juarez I
10. Sanchez
(I could go on with some other good wins)

Morales Top 10
1. Barrera I
2. Pacquiao I
3. Jones
4. Kelley
5. Zaragoza
6. Chavez
7. Chi
8. Espadas jr I
9. McCullough
10. Hernandez
(Once again there are others who are worthy)

Before I broke it down I was ready to say Barrera easily, but now its alittle closer than I first thought. Still Barrera by a nose though.

Barrera beat Hamad when it looked like he was unbeatable. Nod to Barrera,but Morales gave it a good run also.

dempseyfire wrote:I disagree.

I personally had their trilogy 1-1-1, the rubber match being a draw (HBO's rooting and bias in favor of MAB was sickening)

Morales beat Junior Jones, McCullough, Chi, Ayala Hernandez, Chavez, and Pacquiao.

Barrera beat Hamed, Ayala, an older Kelley, lost twice to Junior Jones, lost twice to Pacquiao.


Morales has the better resume and in his prime IMO was the better fighter. I think some are swayed by HBO's love affair with MAB that existed the past few years. Barrera was slicker boxing wise but Morales's boxing ability is under-rated, and he was also the bigger hitter/more durable.

No Morales was not more durable, nor was he the boxer Barrera was. He was a sour puss.

ringsider wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:I disagree.

I personally had their trilogy 1-1-1, the rubber match being a draw (HBO's rooting and bias in favor of MAB was sickening)

Morales beat Junior Jones, McCullough, Chi, Ayala Hernandez, Chavez, and Pacquiao.

Barrera beat Hamed, Ayala, an older Kelley, lost twice to Junior Jones, lost twice to Pacquiao.


Morales has the better resume and in his prime IMO was the better fighter. I think some are swayed by HBO's love affair with MAB that existed the past few years. Barrera was slicker boxing wise but Morales's boxing ability is under-rated, and he was also the bigger hitter/more durable.

No Morales was not more durable, nor was he the boxer Barrera was. He was a sour puss.

Not more durable?? He was only ever stopped by Pacquao at the tail end of his career (and many had him beating Diaz in his very last fight)
Barrera was stopped by Jones and Pacquao and hurt/dropped many more times.

I'd put McCullogh, Hernandez, and Chi all over Rocky Juarez and a washed up "Mi Vida Loca". Juarez has proven to simply be a gatekeeper.

Again, I and others scored the rubber match a draw.

I had Barrera winning all three Morales bouts, the first was a robbery. The decisions against marquez and the second Jones fight could have gone either way. I had Morales losing the Espadas fight and I wouldnt include McCullough as one of his great wins. McCullough was just a tough feather fisted face first fighter. Lets also not forget that when Barrera fought Morales the first time Morales was in his prime and Barrera was supposed to be past his prime, same when he fought Hamed. Its too his credit that he was so damn good for so long and when he was seemingly supposed to be slowing down.

It will be interesting how history treats them.

One is cerebral the other emotional. Though each had a liberal helping of the other dynamic certainly.

They fought 3 competitive fights....you guys can argue all day long about which one eeked out which rounds. It was 30 plus rounds of warring with ebbs and flows. They seemed to enjoy beating the hell out of each other.

Morales seemed to be able to deal with Barrera's worst nemesis's better than Barrera could. Jones and Pacquiao. Morales seemed to take more chances once he stepped into the ring with his opponent. So he may have been a shade more exciting to watch.

I got to call this about a dead even heat. Pick your preference between head and heart fighters they both represent the best of their genre.

Morales does not make the top 100 all-time in my book.

Barrera is a top 100 all-time great fighter.

I would say Barrera by a hair but Morales did beat the men who beat Barrera.

klompton wrote:I had Barrera winning all three Morales bouts, the first was a robbery. The decisions against marquez and the second Jones fight could have gone either way. I had Morales losing the Espadas fight and I wouldnt include McCullough as one of his great wins. McCullough was just a tough feather fisted face first fighter. Lets also not forget that when Barrera fought Morales the first time Morales was in his prime and Barrera was supposed to be past his prime, same when he fought Hamed. Its too his credit that he was so damn good for so long and when he was seemingly supposed to be slowing down.

Wow, claiming that Morales didn't win one of the Barrera fights and saying the Marquez fight "could've gone either way" . . . someone has a pretty big bias for MAB.

The very fact some believed Barrera to be past it pre-Hamed fight was that MAB had been in so many wars/knock-down drag out battles in his prime. For supposedly being such an "inferior" boxer, Morales was simply destroying the same guys at his peak.

I'm a big fan of both fighters but HBO really set Barrera up to be better than Morales throughout their careers and many simply ate it up. Their bias for Barrera was similar to their ridiculous treatment of Gatti.

For me Morales was the better fighter, but his prime was shorter than Barrera. And I also score the trilogy 1-1-1. No real edge between them, however, prime for prime Morales has the better record against common opponents.

Both were top quality fighters in their era's...... I had them 1-1-1 (head to head).

As for who'd I'd rate higher.....I give the slight edge to Morales...

"Dos...! Dos...!"

Ahem, sorry.

My favourite was Barrera.

But hand on heart, Morales was just as good.

Looking back on their careers, as someone else said, from the vantage point of thirty years, will we perhaps think of Marco's wins as aberrations, rather like Chucho Castillo and Rafa Wotsisface (shit, I've forgotten his name) versus Olivares? Or will the defeat of Hamed & the closing of business in the trilogy outshine Erik's better performances vs. MAB's nemesises... Nemeses. Nemesisesses. Fark it, you know what I mean. The two blokes who Marco couldn't beat (Jones & Pacquiao).

But then, Marco's handspeed always seemed to trouble Erik... & the arguments will go on...

Barrera.

Morales

Morales was the better boxer/fighter. Morales beat Pac and Barrera, enough said. Prime for prime, I take Morales over Barrera anytime. Hammed was a good win by Barrera but Hammed could never be compared to Pac. Morales for me has a better resume than Barrera.

elmersalsa wrote:Morales does not make the top 100 all-time in my book.

Barrera is a top 100 all-time great fighter.

Elmer why you don't post your precious top 100 all-time great fighter list? You always bringing that up with nothing to back it up. Were is you list? Love to see where you rank Leonard (Duran's daddy), and other greats. We all know DLH, Morales, and Benitez does not make your top 100. Post the list, we all are eager to see that list.

Barrales

BoxBuzz wrote:Barrales

Finally someone I could agree with

Interesting to see with time I think more opinions would swing towards Morales (my pick BTW ). Morales just narrowly lost to a top 5 140 lber and now it's clear as crystal Pacquao is well ahead of Hamed in terms of a resume booster.

BoxBuzz wrote:Barrales

Morerra