Who's the best fighter in floyd's resume???

Corrales was definitely legit when they fought. Oscar was a bit OTH, but still a legit opponent. Especially when the fight was at 154...

Castillo for me..

Oscar De La Hoya does.

Oscar obvoisly. Castillo a close second.

people forget pac was getting as much as he was giving up until the morales legs went. the fight was very close until morales' got tired and his corner started massaging his legs which made it worse. When the corner massaged his legs, Emmanuel Steward immediately knew the fight was over. That guy has an uncanny knack for analyzing fights as they're happening. His predictions aren't the greatest though, unless they're after the first round, then he's almost too good. Sometimes he steals the drama of a fight while it's happening, because he's so in tune to the fight. Morales showed great toughness in that second fight. He won some rounds for sure. And a lot of it was just based on the fact that he was willing to take leather to give some. Part of me doesn't want EM to come back. The other part can't wait, because he was an absolute privelege to watch in the ring.

I never really was a huge fan cause I think he's kind of an asshole. I always like Morales much more. The Pac rematch should've never happened IMO. Still, he was a great fighter. blame golden boy and top rank. if a rematch was to happen it should've been when marco was #1 and a champ at 130. not after he lost to jmm.

i use to love barrera but i lost a lot of respect for him lately to be honest. still a great fighter but i think he tried to find ways out of the 1st pac fight and khan fight and just fought to collect a paycheck and survive in the pac rematch. I never really was a huge fan cause I think he's kind of an asshole. I always like Morales much more. The Pac rematch should've never happened IMO. Still, he was a great fighter.

The third fight with Erik was pretty sad, no need for it, really. But I get what you mean about a conclusion. but see we didn't know that going in. morales could have probably lasted longer if he stuck to his gameplan from fight 1. him trying to slug it out was suicide. especially after we saw what happened with hatton and cotto this year. morales was a beast.

The third fight with Erik was pretty sad, no need for it, really. But I get what you mean about a conclusion.

Yes exactly, Morales performance itself legitimises that Pacquiao win. I feel it's a little unfairly written off on here at times. people forget pac was getting as much as he was giving up until the morales legs went. the fight was very close until morales' got tired and his corner started massaging his legs which made it worse.

I say it's ABOUT equal. Give or take. Barrera and Castillo were always beatable fighters. So Pacquiao beating Barrera was an achievement, but not something unheard of. Same thing with Castillo. One more point, clearly Barrera had a perfect style for Pacquiao to win, whereas Castillo had the perfect style to beat Floyd. And it's been used as a blueprint on how to beat Floyd. So taking away what you think about either fighter. Is it harder to beat a guy that's built for you? Or a guy that's built to beat you? PS - I have nothing but respect for the four mentioned above, all great fighters. I do think Barrera is a dirty bastard though, and the Khan fight might have been karma. i use to love barrera but i lost a lot of respect for him lately to be honest. still a great fighter but i think he tried to find ways out of the 1st pac fight and khan fight and just fought to collect a paycheck and survive in the pac rematch.

besides , morales was doing good in the rematch up until the end when his legs went. Yes exactly, Morales performance itself legitimises that Pacquiao win. I feel it's a little unfairly written off on here at times.

He didn't need to face Morales a 3rd time, the 3rd match was bullshit. I can understand avenging a lost. we say that now. fact is people like a conclusion. they don't want it 1-1. besides , morales was doing good in the rematch up until the end when his legs went. people thought maybe if he trains better and gets his dad back to train him (his dad didn't train him for the rematch) that he could still win. easier to say the 3rd shouldn't have happened after the fact. besides......the best selling ppv fights ever under welterweight (at the time) you know uncle bob will not be denied. :lol1:

castillo was the cream of the crop at 135. barrera was considered the greater/better fighter at the time though. i don't think it's equal in achievement. people like names. even historians. 20 years from now , right or wrong , people will consider the morales/barrera wins superior to castillo/corrales. I say it's ABOUT equal. Give or take. Barrera and Castillo were always beatable fighters. So Pacquiao beating Barrera was an achievement, but not something unheard of. Same thing with Castillo. One more point, clearly Barrera had a perfect style for Pacquiao to win, whereas Castillo had the perfect style to beat Floyd. And it's been used as a blueprint on how to beat Floyd. So taking away what you think about either fighter. Is it harder to beat a guy that's built for you? Or a guy that's built to beat you? PS - I have nothing but respect for the four mentioned above, all great fighters. I do think Barrera is a dirty bastard though, and the Khan fight might have been karma.

If you're asking simply which boxer Mayweather fought had the best combination of career and talent it'd have to be De La Hoya. If you're asking which is the best win it's a bit different, you have three things to take into account; name value, where they were in their career and the manner of victory. Which would probably make it Corrales.

oh hush. pacquiao takes too much crap for the morales wins. fact is morales was #2 at 130 when pacquiao moved up to fight him. #1 was a guy pacquiao already beat in barrera. say what you want about morales being past it but the fact is pacquiao had to fight him 2 more times. once to avenge the loss and the rubber match to break up the tie. morales is what baldomir or zab is to mayweather. it's not mayweather's fault baldomir was the champion as weak as he was. it wasn't mayweather's fault zab screwed up their fight by losing his tuneup beforehand. just like it's not pacquiao's fault morales was past it. it's not like people thought he was shot until the AFTER the last fight. He didn't need to face Morales a 3rd time, the 3rd match was bullshit. I can understand avenging a lost.

You're right about MAB though, great win. I honestly don't believe Pacquiao would have stopped a prime Morales. not the 122-130 version. maybe the pacquiao now can. that's why i think morales jumped over barrera in legacy. a close to peak barrera lost to 2 guys morales was able to beat. and he beat pacquiao while he was past his best.

castillo was the cream of the crop at 135. barrera was considered the greater/better fighter at the time though. i don't think it's equal in achievement. people like names. even historians. 20 years from now , right or wrong , people will consider the morales/barrera wins superior to castillo/corrales. You're right about MAB though, great win. I honestly don't believe Pacquiao would have stopped a prime Morales.

So weighted drained that he faught 2 more times at 130. He also rehydrated to 146 against Mayweather. rehydrating a lot is what weightdrained is. what delahoya did against pacquiao was not weightdrained. it was overdieting or coming in too light. i don't think corrales was weightdrained against floyd. he was just outclassed.

Morales? :lol1: oh hush. pacquiao takes too much crap for the morales wins. fact is morales was #2 at 130 when pacquiao moved up to fight him. #1 was a guy pacquiao already beat in barrera. say what you want about morales being past it but the fact is pacquiao had to fight him 2 more times. once to avenge the loss and the rubber match to break up the tie. morales is what baldomir or zab is to mayweather. it's not mayweather's fault baldomir was the champion as weak as he was. it wasn't mayweather's fault zab screwed up their fight by losing his tuneup beforehand. just like it's not pacquiao's fault morales was past it. it's not like people thought he was shot until the AFTER the last fight.