Morales beats him Prime VS Prime at 126/130. Marquez has the upper hand above that.
The Erik Morales vs. Juan Manuel Marquez Debate
Collapse
-
Marquez-Morales could've been the best fight of the whole great 4 fw's era.....can't see how Morales wouldn't **** JMM's face up....his best punches are delivered at the distance JMM is more vulnerable at and he cuts easy. But once he got the timing down, JMM would have a chance to land a fight changing counter and he would work the body viciously too.....Morales would barely finsih the fight IMO, and it would depend on how large a lead he'd built.
Prime for Prime at fw/sfw, i think Morales wins with a knockdown, some extra points by the judges for ****ing JMM's face badly but barely surviving late...
135+ JMM punishes him badly....Morales was just burnt up on boxing and just wasn't in the shape he'd need, and JMM was punching really hard at those weights. Probably not as hard as Maidana in a shot to shot basis, but the skills are a multiplier...It still would probably be a decision if Morales doesn't deliver himself in crazy kamikaze fashion.
As far as resumes, JMM built himself a nice resume by fighting for so much longer than Morales at an elite level....but it's still mostly built on Manny. A lot of the names in his resume above 130 were probably a bit overblown...Barrera was getting old and made him look bad, Casamayor was old and done, Diaz got dominated by Campbell, Alvarado is a head case...and then JMM lost immediatly to Timmy after Manny. I'd go with Erik barely but no question some could rank success over several years more in favour of JMM.
As far as well roundedness, I think Erik was just a bit too arrogant and stubborn to really polish his skills more... he seemed to get caught with brutal punches in every fight....and it was not all due to taking risks, but a certain arrogant confidence in his durablility and being a bit too confident/complacent thinking that he could block or avoid the punch if he saw it coming but not moving fast enough or well enough to get out of the way...
JMM has a brutal style.....i have never seen a man so ready to throw hard counters at any second....his offense needs work when the opponent doesn't give him a bit of agression though......
I say JMM being able to deliver his power so efficiently at bigger guys and the fact that he's not complacent at all, give him the edge in the well rounded cat.Comment
-
I am a huge fan of JMM, and Erik Morales, but Morales was the better fighter hands down, more complete in my eyes, he had underated slickness, had offense and counter ability and had heart.
JMM doesn't have better defense than Morales at all, JMM gets hit a lot, and he never does any clinching, never does any blocking at all, he gets ruffed up by scrubs like Jimrex Jaca and other low level guys, he just wills his way through with heart and counter combos. He is basically a matador style fighter who counters and side steps out.
Morales has better defense, watch him bloated shot, washed up making Maidana miss, he beat Maidana with one eye closed, and yet got robbed, He did way better than Floyd could against Maidana.
Morales would beat Marquez, and that is the honest truth, All Marquez has on his resume is Pacquiao, he only got big off one name, if Marquez was so great why does he struggle with guys like Tandek or whatever that thai fighters name was an that scrub filipino jaca and several other guys? if you put any of those guys in with Floyd or Pacquiao they wouldnt even get touched they would get merked hard.
Marquez is very overrated, mainly by people who hate Pacquiao and die hard Mexican fighter fans. Marquez is basically the Ken Norton of the featherweights, Norton is best known for giving Ali hard fights, just like Pacquiao and Marquez.
Morales was chasing Marquez since 2007 and Marquez never gave him a shot.Comment
-
I think Morales was the more complete fighter and had the better resume. It's harder to say with any certainty who would win a fight between them, but I'd pick Morales there, too.
He was a tremendous fighter. I've seen him box, I've seen him brawl, I've seen him beat ATGs at their best. He was a truly special fighter.Comment
-
Pretty tough call, Morales flame burned hotter but JMM lasted a lot longer. They were both pretty well rounded but I think JMM was the better boxer because while he would get tagged early it happened less as fights would go where as Morales would just deal with it and grind the other guy down.
Tough to say who would win a fight at the lower weights when they were both really good, Morales would definitely touch JMM up early and Morales would not be easy to turn it around against like JMM did so many times but it would be a race to who would get the rounds with the wildcard being if Morales could drop JMM early (very possible) which would make it very tough for JMM to come back because I think JMM would have a hard time returning the favor.Comment
-
It's been a long time since this once repetitive topic has been discussed. Basically, this is a 3 part question:
1. Who is the more complete well rounded fighter and why?
2. Who has the better resume and accomplishments and why?
3. Who would have won the head to head match-up at or near their primes and why?
I'll think about it and give my thoughts later.
Morales in all 3 counts. piss drinker ain't on Morales level.
specially in the well rounded dept.
JMM is a great counterpuncher but a ****ty come forward fighter
everytime he's been forced to lead, he's looked awfulComment
-
Yeah JMM is one dimensional, he cannot fight going forward at all everytime he tries to pressure a guy thats when he gets dropped and hit.
I still cant believe someone said he has GREAT defense? The man doesn't slip shots or hold or block shots at all, he gets hit he relies purely on counter combos timing guys off the back foot.
of Morales, Barrera, and Pacquiao, Marquez actually has the worst defense of the bunch, he has probably been hit and dropped the most of all of them, only thing about Marquez is the guy is unknockoutable and super resilient he can take a beating and keep on ticking, he is the guy who can comeback from the worst bloodiest beating and still knock you out cold like in the 4th Manny fight, he was taking a savage beating with blood squirting from the hole on the bridge of his nose and still wasn't going to go down.Comment
-
Marquez has always been a counterpuncher primarily. Morales was more versatile IMO. He could box, trade, counterpunch, everything really. Morales also was willing to fight anybody which Marquez I do not believe was. He denied Pac a 5th fight. I'm pretty sure Morales would fight Pacman a hundred times.It's been a long time since this once repetitive topic has been discussed. Basically, this is a 3 part question:
1. Who is the more complete well rounded fighter and why?
2. Who has the better resume and accomplishments and why?
3. Who would have won the head to head match-up at or near their primes and why?
I'll think about it and give my thoughts later.
I think Marquez does have the better resume though. Barrera, Pacquiao, Diaz, Casamayor, Medina, Juarez, Katsidis, Alvarado. And his longevity has been far superior. Morales was more fun to watch a lot of times but he paid for it down the line.
In their primes, I go with Morales, especially at featherweight and probably super featherweight. Any higher and I'd go with Marquez. The real tragedy here is that it never happened and from what I read, Morales was willing and Marquez(as is his custom) turned him down.Comment
-
Morales wins hands down, I dont see in anyway how Marquez can overcome Morales skills.
Dude was too good.Comment
Comment