Top 50 fighters last 30 years ie since 1984

[Suckmedry]

And IMO Marquez is greater than both skill wise. Resume I'm not as sure but he's definitely in the same class

[Sugar Adam Ali]

IMO morales and Barrera are about even. Morales' win over pacquiao will stand the test of time as a truly great win. As will barreras over the prince.

Yeah, that's how I feel.. They are about as close as 2 fighters can be

[soul_survivor]

And IMO Marquez is greater than both skill wise. Resume I'm not as sure but he's definitely in the same class

Marque is a better counter puncher definitely by Barrera and MOrales are leagues ahead in other aspects, and I'm talking prime for prime.

Plus their resumes pretty much **** on JMM's/

[IronDanHamza]

Barrera's resume is incredibly strong,, beat undefeated prince and undefeated morales both in their primes... Morales might match up better vs manny, but morales doesn't have any great wins besides that except for the highly controversial Barrera win..

How is it incredibly strong? It's not at all.

He has Morales and he has Hamed, he doesn't have all that much else.

Morales' Barrera win is hardly "Highly controversial" considering he should have won the second fight.

He was lucky to get the decision in the first fight just like Barrera was lucky to get the decision in the second fight.

You say "Morales doesn't have any great wins outside of Pacquaio and Barrera" well what does Barrera have that's great outside of Morales and Hamed?

And beating Pacquaio is better than anything Barrera did in his entire career.

Morales definitely has more depth in his resume than Barrera does.

I don't see how he can easily be rated higher than Barrera when Barrera beat him twice and arguably all three times..

I think morales gets rated higher by some due to his fan friendly style, but if you actually look at his resume, it's not superior to barrera's.. I don't see how a guy can get owned by another great fighter and still be considered the better fighter.. I can't think of any two greats that fought and had a clear winner in the rivalry but the loser being considered better.. Maybe bowe-Holyfield, pep-saddler

He didn't "Arguably beat him all 3 times" because Morales definitely won the second one and I had the 3rd one a draw aswell.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

How is it incredibly strong? It's not at all.

He has Morales and he has Hamed, he doesn't have all that much else.

Morales' Barrera win is hardly "Highly controversial" considering he should have won the second fight.

He was lucky to get the decision in the first fight just like Barrera was lucky to get the decision in the second fight.

You say "Morales doesn't have any great wins outside of Pacquaio and Barrera" well what does Barrera have that's great outside of Morales and Hamed?

And beating Pacquaio is better than anything Barrera did in his entire career.

Morales definitely has more depth in his resume than Barrera does.






He didn't "Arguably beat him all 3 times" because Morales definitely won the second one and I had the 3rd one a draw aswell.

All i was saying that barrera doesnt have a weak resume, especially compared to morales'.. They are about even... I was just pointing it out since some had said that barrera's resume is weak, when it absolutely is not..
Morales' claim to fame is the manny win, which is a great win, but it wasnt a peak manny, it was still the one-diminsional jab, jab, straight left manny.. Barrera could handle the speed and power, but marquez clearly showed that manny was very one-dimensional and could easily be outboxed, jmm chin failed him early in the first fight and cost him the fight.. Iron chinned morales was able to take manny's shots and fire back and he easily outboxed manny.. Manny become a much more all around two fisted fighter later on, but at the time that morales beat him, he was a one trick pony..

Barrera def proved to be the better fighter vs morales,, how can you have the 3rd fight a draw, when barrera dominated the firtst 8 rounds, had morales with a broken nose early, and basically owned him until the last few rounds which were about dead even and morales was going for broke..

Barrera should have won the first fight,, 2nd fight was closer but still had barrera winning it 115-113, and the 3rd was basically a competitive but lop sided decision for barrera,, People act like morales made this great rally late, but actually he just started being active as earlier in the fight, barrera was owning him and breaking his nose and it wasnt till the 9th that morales actually started doing something but just because a guy was doing better doesnt mean he was winning all the late rounds... A draw is a horrible scorecard for the 3rd fight.. that was the most decisive win out of the series, hence why there was no demand for part 4 unlike jmm-manny or marquez-vasquez

[greeh]

Have you decided if Laciar gets included in the list, Adam?

[greeh]

And where the hell is Chang!? :ibutt:

[Holywarrior]

And where the hell is Chang!? :ibutt:

No.

[Holywarrior]

I don't see how he can easily be rated higher than Barrera when Barrera beat him twice and arguably all three times..

I think morales gets rated higher by some due to his fan friendly style, but if you actually look at his resume, it's not superior to barrera's.. I don't see how a guy can get owned by another great fighter and still be considered the better fighter.. I can't think of any two greats that fought and had a clear winner in the rivalry but the loser being considered better.. Maybe bowe-Holyfield, pep-saddler

He did not arguably beat him all 3 times. Maybe by Barrera's mom yeah.

Morales - Jones, Zaragoza, Chavez, Ayala, Barrera, Espadas, Pacquiao, Mccollough, Chi

Barrera - Hamed, Morales, Tapia, Mckinney, Juarez, Peden, Kelley, Maurin

It's Morales pretty clearly to me.

[Humean]

Morales did defeat Pacquiao unlike Barrera but he also got bashed up bad in the two other occasions. Barrera got bashed up bad in one and lost very clearly in the other but wasn't quite as brutalized as Morales was in two of his and Barrera's first outing with Pacquiao. Therefore their relative successes/failures against Pacquiao is not as simple as because Morales defeated Pacquiao therefore, in that respect, that that favours Morales.

He did not arguably beat him all 3 times. Maybe by Barrera's mom yeah.

Morales - Jones, Zaragoza, Chavez, Ayala, Barrera, Espadas, Pacquiao, Mccollough, Chi

Barrera - Hamed, Morales, Tapia, Mckinney, Juarez, Peden, Kelley, Maurin

It's Morales pretty clearly to me.

If you bias your lists by listing 9 opponents for Morales and 8 for Barrera and leave off a noticable win like the Salazar one from Barrera's list and don't acknowledge that he defeated Morales twice and Juarez twice then it is of course going to seem clearer for Morales than it is.

If ever there were two fighters whose careers were very even then it was Barrera and Morales. Trying to separate their careers in terms of greatness is like engaging in the worst excesses of scholasticism. Angels dancing on the heads of pins and all that.