Best Trilogy of these Three?

i think it would've been a one-sided brutal beating in favor of chico if castillo had made weight. not because chico was the better fighter, but because castillo had outgrown 135 by then and would've been a zombie walking into the ring. That was an interesting pair of fights, but I really did get the feeling that Castillo was the better fighter out of the two. I personally felt that he came away from the first fight looking like he did better overall. The second fight obviously gave him an advantage because he didn't make weight, but he blew Corrales out. I agree, if he actually had to get down to 135 for both 2 and 3, he probably would have lost both. How good do you see the rubber of Vazquez-Marquez going?

You thought Bowe-Holyfield III was more competive and exciting than Barrera-Morales II? I'm shocked! Holyfield only had one good moment in the third fight. To whoever suggested Gonzalez-Carbajal, I have only seen the first fight. I voted Barrera-Morales, but everyone already saw my long post on how much I enjoyed it. I just wanted to see if that was the general consensus, or if I needed to go back and watch the other two trilogies to see if I had missed something. No, Barrera-Morales was by far the closest. But Bowe-Holyfield had 3 very good bouts which were all competitive. The first bout was a 8-4 type fight and the rubber match had Bowe all but out in round 6. The 2nd fight was extremely close. Barrera-Morales had 3 very close bouts, but the rematch wasn't very exciting. It was decent, IMO. Gatti-Ward 3 was rather one-sided. Only one fight was competitive. Gatti schooled Ward with one hand in both the 2nd and 3rd fights. Ward won maybe 1 round in the 2nd fight and 2 in the last.

barrera/morales for me! the 3 bouts went the distance and its an all-out war from the get go.. nuff said

this could easily belong to castillo vs corrales may god rest his soul, if castillo would of made weight for their 3rd fight it would of been the best trilogy in boxing i think it would've been a one-sided brutal beating in favor of chico if castillo had made weight. not because chico was the better fighter, but because castillo had outgrown 135 by then and would've been a zombie walking into the ring.

Being that there was no action for the first 6 rounds, I'd call it the dud of the trilogy. Don't get me wrong, once Barrera started moving his hands, he kicked some aserious ass. If I put all three of the trilogies against each other, that fight stands out as the weakest of them. Far and away it is the weakest of the trilogy... I didn't realize you were calling it a dud of the trilogy... I thought you were just calling it a dud, which shocked me. I did think that the first 6 rounds were by far the most exciting rounds of aggressor vs. the moving counterpuncher that I have ever seen. Even when those dudes did things that are typically considered boring, they turned out great.

I would go with Ward and Gatti exciting fights!

Which, consequently is from the second fight. Those who think the second fight of Barrera vs. Morales sucked need to watch it again. I just watched it two night ago... I am going through all of my boxing videos and seeing if they have enough replay value for them to keep. That night I watched two fights. Barrera-Morales II was good enough for me to keep. Hamed-Kelley got cut. So if you thought Barrera-Morales II sucked, seriously watch it again, there is a lot to like about that fight. Being that there was no action for the first 6 rounds, I'd call it the dud of the trilogy. Don't get me wrong, once Barrera started moving his hands, he kicked some aserious ass. If I put all three of the trilogies against each other, that fight stands out as the weakest of them.

Barrera-Morales had the most emotion behind a rivalry I can recall. The second fight was a dud though, but I and II were amazing. Gatti-Ward featured 3 amazing fights, but none of them were for titles or fought at the highest skill level. Holyfield-Bowe was excellent, but Holyfield had nothing in the third fight. Of the three, I'd pick the one featured in my sig. Which, consequently is from the second fight. Those who think the second fight of Barrera vs. Morales sucked need to watch it again. I just watched it two night ago... I am going through all of my boxing videos and seeing if they have enough replay value for them to keep. That night I watched two fights. Barrera-Morales II was good enough for me to keep. Hamed-Kelley got cut. So if you thought Barrera-Morales II sucked, seriously watch it again, there is a lot to like about that fight.

Barrera-Morales had the most emotion behind a rivalry I can recall. The second fight was a dud though, but I and II were amazing. Gatti-Ward featured 3 amazing fights, but none of them were for titles or fought at the highest skill level. Holyfield-Bowe was excellent, but Holyfield had nothing in the third fight. Of the three, I'd pick the one featured in my sig.

Overall it has to be MAB and EM, but the single best fight was between Gatti and Ward.

holyfield-ruiz.....................

bowe-holyfield had 3 very good and competitive bouts. it was the best out of the 3. then the 2nd best was the morales-barrera trilogy. it had 2 really good bouts, and all 3 were close, but the 2nd bout was only alright. gatti-ward only had one competitive bout out of the 3. Gatti schooled ward in the last 2 bouts with one hand. You thought Bowe-Holyfield III was more competive and exciting than Barrera-Morales II? I'm shocked! Holyfield only had one good moment in the third fight. To whoever suggested Gonzalez-Carbajal, I have only seen the first fight. I voted Barrera-Morales, but everyone already saw my long post on how much I enjoyed it. I just wanted to see if that was the general consensus, or if I needed to go back and watch the other two trilogies to see if I had missed something.

MAB/Morales. Because the overall quality level of the fighters, was much much higher. Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

Arrrrtuuurooo Thunderrrrr Gattiiiii!!! :hail:

bowe-holyfield had 3 very good and competitive bouts. it was the best out of the 3. then the 2nd best was the morales-barrera trilogy. it had 2 really good bouts, and all 3 were close, but the 2nd bout was only alright. gatti-ward only had one competitive bout out of the 3. Gatti schooled ward in the last 2 bouts with one hand.

this could easily belong to castillo vs corrales may god rest his soul, if castillo would of made weight for their 3rd fight it would of been the best trilogy in boxing

Barrera- Morales

Barrera-Morales because of the sustained back and forth action in all three fights. There was genuine animosity between these guys and they showed it with their fierce determination in nearly every round. IMO neither one of these guys ever tried as hard as when they fought each other. In terms of sheer drama Gatti-Ward probably takes it, but (cynically) I always felt that the drama in these fights seemed almost too good to be true; that it was a little manufactured. Gatti was clearly the better fighter of the pair. He was younger, faster and much more skilled, yet he always managed to make the Ward fights exciting. As much as I love Gatti, I always thought he was a bit of a drama queen. Whether it was conscious or not, he seemed to intentionally create drama in a lot of his fights when it wasn't absolutely necessary. I think that a fair amount of the drama in the Gatti-Ward fights was the result of Gatti's brawler instinct, but I also attribute a lot of it to Gatti's irrepressible desire to excite the fans and deliver on the promise of an epic battle equal to the one's he'd become famous for. Even though Gatti won the second and third fights pretty easily, it seemed to me that he tried extra hard to make those fights exciting for the fans. Having handled Ward easily in the rematch, the rubbermatch should have been a whitewash for Gatti, especially considering that Ward came in to that last fight emotionally retired. The third fight turned out to be pretty exciting though, mostly because Gatti again hurt his hand, allowing Ward to surge a bit. I'm not going to say he faked or exaggerated his hand injury in that fight (Jim Lampley certainly exaggerated it though), but the injury did create drama exactly when the fight needed it. Still loved this trilogy. Bowe-Holyfield comes in third for me. Lots of drama, no doubt, but not quite the sustained action of the other two fights. Also, Bowe won this trilogy, so that doesn't help.

I went with Holy/Bowe simply because the fights were for the HW championship. Barrera/Morales were great too but I like bigger guys better than the little guys. Ward/Gatti speaks for itself but the fights were for nothing but entertainment purposes......

I thought the second Ali vs Frazier fight was pretty good, should've been 15 rounds though. Usually the second fights are the weakest in trilogies. Gatti vs Ward is two guys slugging it out but I only like the first fight, Bowe vs Holyfield and Barrera vs Morales are both great trilogies. Barrera vs Morales had more emotion in it, both HATED each other even though they were both Mexican. Barrera seemed like a rich, arrogant guy and Morales seemed like the poor, angry dude or something like that. Holyfield vs Bowe was interesting because of the huge size difference between the two. Zale vs Graziano was great. I've only seen the third one (the only one that exists I think) and it was awesome. It's said to be the worst of their three fights so the other two must've been something else.