Barrera and Morales

[WhataRock]

With their respective careers all but over (or there abouts) how will these guys be remembered...

Where do they sit in your list of alltime fighters? In or out of the top 50?

What was their best win? Best Performance?

What division do you think their best work was in and where do they sit alltime for that weight?

[Russell]

Morales is seemingly becoming more highly thought of by the day with his past prime win over Manny Pacquiao. One of those wins that grows in time, you know?

[Sweet Pea]

Morales is seemingly becoming more highly thought of by the day with his past prime win over Manny Pacquiao. One of those wins that grows in time, you know?
Not by me, Pacquiao's clearly improved since then, but still lacks the technical skills to beat the very best in any of the division's he's fought in IMO, though he has the ability to fight in a wider variety of weights at a high level, a trait most don't share, which is why he ranks particularly highly P4P in comparison to his peers.

[stonerose]

Not by me, Pacquiao's clearly improved since then, but still lacks the technical skills to beat the very best in any of the division's he's fought in IMO, though he has the ability to fight in a wider variety of weights at a high level, a trait most don't share, which is why he ranks particularly highly P4P in comparison to his peers.


How do you think he'll get on against Hatton, the best at LWW ?

[WhataRock]

Just curious P who would you have picked to beat him at 122 at the time he was champ?

Or a you refering to the very best alltime...

[Addie]

With their respective careers all but over (or there abouts) how will these guys be remembered...


They will be both remembered as two of the best Mexican's of their era, and should both be in the top 100 P4P, at least. It's hard to separate the two, Morales will be remembered more for his consistency and relentless style, whereas Barrera should be remembered more for his bounce back ability and his technical ability, especially later in his career. Arguably, neither of their legacy's are complete because they are both making comebacks. Ironically, despite how much mileage is on Barrera, I could see him being competitive with a Nate Campbell.

Where do they sit in your list of alltime fighters? In or out of the top 50?


I have a lot of affection for Barrera. I think he was a fighter's fighter, and gave the fans and the world a lot of great fights, as did Morales. They should both be placed next to one another, I believe. Morales beat men Barrera lost too, but Barrera ultimately went 2-1 over good versions of Morales, so there isn't a great deal to seperate the two. I don't have a definitive top 100 p4p list, but I would have them around 80-100. Personally.

What was their best win? Best Performance?

I haven't really followed the career of Morales, so I shall leave that to the Morales enthusiasts, but Barrera had a few great performances during his career. The Mckinney fight represented his first real step up in class ,and he passed that with flying colours. Also, his bounce back, so to speak, against Morales in their first fight was a great performance against his toughest opposition. He lost that fight, but many thought he deserved the nod.

However, despite those two fights, I will always maintain that Barrera's finest ever performance was in the rubber match. He was spellbindingly good for the majority of that fight, putting together beautiful three-punch combinations, and although he was open to the right hand counter down the stretch, his left hand was wonderful throughout. Also when you consider that he was coming off a devatastaing loss to Manny Pacquiao, and was a 3-1 underdog in the fight, he silenced the critics once again by beating a good version of Morales. Neither fighter were in their prime during that fight, but they both raised their game.

What division do you think their best work was in and where do they sit all time for that weight?

Barrera was probably at his peak at 122, and although he got most of his victories at that weight, he got his signature wins up at Feather and Super feather. His best opposition came at 126, and it's much easier to look good against an oldish Mckinney than it is prime Morales and prime Hamed. I have to say 126, but many people will probably say 122.

[Russell]

I've always wondered what the consensus was on their best wins, Morales against Pacquiao or Barrera against Hamed?

[Addie]

I've always wondered what the consensus was on their best wins, Morales against Pacquiao or Barrera against Hamed?

I would agree that Morales best win was against Pacquiao. People will bark on about how much Pacquiao improved after the first fight, but Morales had already seen his best days, and it took a huge effort from him to pull out the victory, which I think was pretty clear. You could argue he lost the first Barrera fight, but not much arguement about this one.

Barrera's best win was probably his third fight with Morales. I dunno, perhaps even I doubted his ability to hang with Morales after the disaster of the Pacquiao fight. There was no doubt that Morales had probably shown signs of slipping himself in the fights leading up to the rubber match, but he was never blown away like Barrera was. For him to muster up that performance against Morales, who had only lost the 1 fight and that was too Barrera, was noteworthy in my book.

Hamed wasn't on the same level as a Morales, soon as he lost he faded into obscurity. When Barrera and Morales both lost, they both made come backs.

[stonerose]

I would agree that Morales best win was against Pacquiao. People will bark on about how much Pacquiao improved after the first fight, but Morales had already seen his best days, and it took a huge effort from him to pull out the victory, which I think was pretty clear. You could argue he lost the first Barrera fight, but not much arguement about this one.

Barrera's best win was probably his third fight with Morales. I dunno, perhaps even I doubted his ability to hang with Morales after the disaster of the Pacquiao fight. There was no doubt that Morales had probably shown signs of slipping himself in the fights leading up to the rubber match, but he was never blown away like Barrera was. For him to muster up that performance against Morales, who had only lost the 1 fight and that was too Barrera, was noteworthy in my book.

Hamed wasn't on the same level as a Morales, soon as he lost he faded into obscurity. When Barrera and Morales both lost, they both made come backs.


Barrera WAS the reason Hamed faded into obscurity, the defeat and the manner in which he was man-handled and battered made him re-avaluate his previous cinviction that he was unbeatable.

[Russell]

Hamed wasn't on the same level as a Morales, soon as he lost he faded into obscurity. When Barrera and Morales both lost, they both made come backs.

Hamed very much was a elite fighter. He faded into obscurity because of his mental shortcomings, not a talent deficit.

[Addie]

Hamed very much was a elite fighter. He faded into obscurity because of his mental shortcomings, not a talent deficit.

Which is precisely why he wasn't on the same level as either of those two. Boxing, as you very well know, is just as mental as it is physical. If you don't have the mental capacity to take a defeat and comeback from it, then I don't see how you can really be considered elite.

[DINAMITA]

With their respective careers all but over (or there abouts) how will these guys be remembered...

Where do they sit in your list of alltime fighters? In or out of the top 50?

What was their best win? Best Performance?

What division do you think their best work was in and where do they sit alltime for that weight?

I posted my all-time pound-for-pound top 100 in the General last week, and I ranked Barrera 84th and Morales 88th. I think they were both superb fighters and I loved watching them both, we were lucky to have them in our era IMO.

Barrera's best win and performance was Hamed.

Morales's best win and performance was Pacquiao I.

[DINAMITA]

Which is precisely why he wasn't on the same level as either of those two. Boxing, as you very well know, is just as mental as it is physical. If you don't have the mental capacity to take a defeat and comeback from it, then I don't see how you can really be considered elite.

Hamed wasn't elite for other reasons - resume being the main one. He looked sensational beating up tomato cans and faded veterans - how can anyone be called elite when the best fighter they ever beat was Vuyani Bungu? Hamed could have fought Marquez or Norwood or Espinosa or Morales, but he never did. The resumes of Barrera and Morales shame him. He was never on their level IMO - or at least, he never proved he was.

[Addie]

Hamed wasn't elite for other reasons - resume being the main one. He looked sensational beating up tomato cans and faded veterans - how can anyone be called elite when the best fighter they ever beat was Vuyani Bungu? Hamed could have fought Marquez or Norwood or Espinosa or Morales, but he never did. The resumes of Barrera and Morales shame him. He was never on their level IMO - or at least, he never proved he was.

I agree. :good

I don't even understand how he could think he was unbeatable. He looked vulnerable against Kelley, and would often get tagged by B level fighters. He was never on the same level as Morales or Barrera, and he didn't give his resume a chance to defy that notion by basically retiring after his first defeat. Had Barrera retired after Jones, we'd be the saying the same thing about him.

I disagree with your point when you said Hamed was Barrera's best win. I think considering Morales was better than Hamed, and Barrera was coming off a loss to Pacquiao, his best win was Morales III. To consider Hamed Barrera's best win would imply you rate Hamed highly, and I never did. Sure, he dazzled against C levels, but he couldn't cut it at the highest level.

[DINAMITA]

I agree. :good

I don't even understand how he could think he was unbeatable. He looked vulnerable against Kelley, and would often get tagged by B level fighters. He was never on the same level as Morales or Barrera, and he didn't give his resume a chance to defy that notion by basically retiring after his first defeat. Had Barrera retired after Jones, we'd be the saying the same thing about him.

I disagree with your point when you said Hamed was Barrera's best win. I think considering Morales was better than Hamed, and Barrera was coming off a loss to Pacquiao, his best win was Morales III. To consider Hamed Barrera's best win would imply you rate Hamed highly, and I never did. Sure, he dazzled against C levels, but he couldn't cut it at the highest level.

Exactly. People seem to think he was a God because he could dazzle and embarrass fighters of the calibre of Steve Robinson (often the same guys who think Joe Calzaghe is a legend ATG because he could box rings round Jeff Lacy), without any thought to the standard of opposition being faced. Hamed fans cling to this myth that when he was young and with Brendan Ingle he was the third Sugar Ray, but then when Ingle left he became obsessed with one-punch KOs and the standard of his performance plummeted - total nonsense. Before Ingle left, the opposition Hamed was facing was diabolical, that was the reason he looked so good, but the glaring flaws in his all-round game were always there, always. Even as a fan of his back in the day, I always knew as soon as he faced his first top quality opponent, he would be beaten and beaten well. After Ingle left, the standard of opposition improved and this is why his performances deteriorated, the guys he was facing in his later years had a better idea of how to exploit his obvious weaknesses - though Hamed did manage to turn the clock back with the marvellous win over Bungu (the key reason why I don't accept this shit about him being amazing with Ingle and nothing without him, and also why I can only laugh at the view that Hamed was "past-prime" when he got to Barrera - he was 27!!).

I still think Hamed was Barrera's best win though. Yes, Morales was a clearly superior fighter to Hamed, but Barrera beat Hamed far more convincingly than he ever beat Morales. MAB was a master that night.

[Addie]

Exactly. People seem to think he was a God because he could dazzle and embarrass fighters of the calibre of Steve Robinson (often the same guys who think Joe Calzaghe is a legend ATG because he could box rings round Jeff Lacy), without any thought to the standard of opposition being faced. Hamed fans cling to this myth that when he was young and with Brendan Ingle he was the third Sugar Ray, but then when Ingle left he became obsessed with one-punch KOs and the standard of his performance plummeted - total nonsense. Before Ingle left, the opposition Hamed was facing was diabolical, that was the reason he looked so good, but the glaring flaws in his all-round game were always there, always. Even as a fan of his back in the day, I always knew as soon as he faced his first top quality opponent, he would be beaten and beaten well. After Ingle left, the standard of opposition improved and this is why his performances deteriorated, the guys he was facing in his later years had a better idea of how to exploit his obvious weaknesses - though Hamed did manage to turn the clock back with the marvellous win over Bungu (the key reason why I don't accept this shit about him being amazing with Ingle and nothing without him, and also why I can only laugh at the view that Hamed was "past-prime" when he got to Barrera - he was 27!!).

I still think Hamed was Barrera's best win though. Yes, Morales was a clearly superior fighter to Hamed, but Barrera beat Hamed far more convincingly than he ever beat Morales. MAB was a master that night.

I can't disagree with any of that. Great post.

[jc]

Fantastic fighters, like someone has alreay said we were lucky to have them around in our era.

Personally im a Barrera man :D and cant put morales ahead of him, ive never bothered to do a top 100 all time, but I can see them both being ranked very highly.

Barrera was definately the better of the two.

Barrera - Morales 1 and 3 are 2 of my fav fights ever.

[Addie]

Fantastic fighters, like someone has alreay said we were lucky to have them around in our era.

Personally im a Barrera man :D and cant put morales ahead of him, ive never bothered to do a top 100 all time, but I can see them both being ranked very highly.

Barrera was definately the better of the two.

Barrera - Morales 1 and 3 are 2 of my fav fights ever.

Same here man. I think their third fight is truly awesome, and has many qualities other than lots of action.

[DINAMITA]

Same here man. I think their third fight is truly awesome, and has many qualities other than lots of action.

People often seem to think Barrera-Morales I and III were just Gatti-Ward style brawls, but for me they are perfect examples of the Sweet Science, the absolute peak of class, quality and excitement. Two proud, brilliant warriors, so evenly matched, so desperate to win, so skilled - its fights like those that MMA can never match. The Noble Art.

[Addie]

People often seem to think Barrera-Morales I and III were just Gatti-Ward style brawls, but for me they are perfect examples of the Sweet Science, the absolute peak of class, quality and excitement. Two proud, brilliant warriors, so evenly matched, so desperate to win, so skilled - its fights like those that MMA can never match. The Noble Art.

Barrera vs Morales III is one of the most technical action fights I think I've ever seen. You can almost see Morales brain working in round 7, where he finally starts to time Barrera's punches with his overhand right. That was the turning point in the fight for me, but before all that, Barrera was really putting on a dazzling display of combination punching and body attack. One of my favorite fighters of all time.

[Robbi]

Barrera was brilliant against Jesus Salud, the fight before Hamed, where he put a marker on the task ahead for Hamed. Even Steward said during the commentary that Hamed was in for a tough nights work based on what he had just seen. I think Salud was southpaw as well.

The fight after Hamed was also against a southpaw, Enrique Sanchez. He threw every punch possible against a lefty with effectiveness. His left hooks to the body were delivered with precision, his jab was brilliant, as was his straight right hand.

Barrera's prime was from the Salud fight up until he ran into Pacquaio in late 2003. During that three year period he was a complete versatile fighter.

[Addie]

Barrera was brilliant against Jesus Salud, the fight before Hamed, where he put a marker on the task ahead for Hamed. Even Steward said during the commentary that Hamed was in for a tough nights work based on what he had just seen. I think Salud was southpaw as well.

The fight after Hamed was also against a southpaw, Enrique Sanchez. He threw every punch possible against a lefty with effectiveness. His left hooks to the body were delivered with precision, his jab was brilliant, as was his straight right hand.

Barrera's prime was from the Salud fight up until he ran into Pacquaio in late 2003. During that three year period he was a complete versatile fighter.

Thanks for the insight, Robbi.

I'll check out the Salud fight in a second.

[PowerPuncher]

1. Exactly. People seem to think he was a God because he could dazzle and embarrass fighters of the calibre of Steve Robinson (often the same guys who think Joe Calzaghe is a legend ATG because he could box rings round Jeff Lacy), without any thought to the standard of opposition being faced.

2. Hamed fans cling to this myth that when he was young and with Brendan Ingle he was the third Sugar Ray, but then when Ingle left he became obsessed with one-punch KOs and the standard of his performance plummeted - total nonsense. Before Ingle left, the opposition Hamed was facing was diabolical, that was the reason he looked so good, but the glaring flaws in his all-round game were always there, always. Even as a fan of his back in the day, I always knew as soon as he faced his first top quality opponent, he would be beaten and beaten well. After Ingle left, the standard of opposition improved and this is why his performances deteriorated, the guys he was facing in his later years had a better idea of how to exploit his obvious weaknesses - though Hamed did manage to turn the clock back with the marvellous win over Bungu (the key reason why I don't accept this shit about him being amazing with Ingle and nothing without him, and also why I can only laugh at the view that Hamed was "past-prime" when he got to Barrera - he was 27!!).

3. I still think Hamed was Barrera's best win though. Yes, Morales was a clearly superior fighter to Hamed, but Barrera beat Hamed far more convincingly than he ever beat Morales. MAB was a master that night.

1. Simply mentioning Robinson is vastly downplaying Hamed's opposition, he did clean out the featherweight division unifying all belts and beating champs from lower divisions. Robinson was the cinderella man but a very good 1 with some excellent wins.

2. I think he was past prime simply because he became flat footed and started only looking for 1 punch hayemakers, which he'd lunge in on, where as he threw combos when younger. He also got slower. I think he just fell out of love with the game. Hamed would have beat a 1995 Barrera and not just because he was better in 1995 but because Barrera was more reckless

3. Actually I think Barrera-Morales 1 was Barrera's best win he completely battered and dominated Morales despite not getting the decision. The Hamed fight was more cautious and calculated, the Morales fight combined his newly aquired boxing skills with his old brawling ability.

[PowerPuncher]

Barrera's prime was from the Salud fight up until he ran into Pacquaio in late 2003..

I think he was past his prime by the second Morales fight, he looked faded and didnt want to engage as much at that stage.

I think Barrera-Morales 1 was the last time Barrera really wanted to leave his guts splattered all over the ring after that he was Captain Cautious and Pacquaio exploited this

[Sweet Pea]

Just curious P who would you have picked to beat him at 122 at the time he was champ?

Or a you refering to the very best alltime...All time. I think he loses to at least the upper tier greats (and certain lesser regarded fighters) at all of the weights he's fought at, though 122 is far from stacked so he'd be among the top 5-10 best there.

[Sweet Pea]

How do you think he'll get on against Hatton, the best at LWW ?
If he beats Hatton, I'll give him much more credit for it than his win over DLH, I'll tell you that. I could see it being done, though I wouldn't favor him at the moment.

[Robbi]

I think he was past his prime by the second Morales fight, he looked faded and didnt want to engage as much at that stage.

He looked far from faded against Morales for the rematch, and never engaged due to his choice of tactics. Nothing to do with not wanting to stand and trade because he was past his peak. He was clearly at his best at featherweight between 2000-2003.


I think Barrera-Morales 1 was the last time Barrera really wanted to leave his guts splattered all over the ring after that he was Captain Cautious and Pacquaio exploited this.


When was his prime in your opinion? Don't tell me at super-bantamweight. He was nowehere near as resourceful or versatile at 122lbs. His biggest wins weren't there either.

[Addie]

When was his prime in your opinion? Don't tell me at super-bantamweight. He was nowehere near as resourceful or versatile at 122lbs. His biggest wins weren't there either.

I agree.

[PowerPuncher]

1. He looked far from faded against Morales for the rematch, and never engaged due to his choice of tactics. Nothing to do with not wanting to stand and trade because he was past his peak. He was clearly at his best at featherweight between 2000-2003.

2. When was his prime in your opinion? Don't tell me at super-bantamweight. He was nowehere near as resourceful or versatile at 122lbs. His biggest wins weren't there either.

1. A fighter only want to go deep deep into the trenches so many times, this was Barrera's last time, I just don't think he wanted to leave his guts in the ring after the first war, after that he became the technician.

To beat Morales he needed to be more agressive, I had him winning the rematch 7-5 but it wasn't the same Barrera from the first fight, physically he may have been the same but he didn't want any more wars and that detracts from him in 1 way and in another makes him better.

2. 2000-2001 at his absolute best, Morales 1 was his redemption moment, Hamed was his crowning moment, after that he bathed in his glory and dropped off a little. I think he showed he had both refinement and aggression in Morales 1. Thats a very different fighter to the man who lost to Jones and beat Mkkinney

It should be noted 122 suits Barrera better than any other weight. He went to 126 to chase Hamed and to 130 to chase Morales. barrera also fought at his weigh in weight while Morales and Pacquiao dehydrated for the weigh in to add 10-15lbs on fight night

It should also be noted that Pacman 2 and Marquez fights were a hell of allot closer than anyone gives MAB credit for. I had him edging JMM in a very close fight.

[Addie]

1. A fighter only want to go deep deep into the trenches so many times, this was Barrera's last time, after that he became the technician.

To beat Morales he needed to be more agressive, I had him winning the rematch 7-5 but it wasn't the same Barrera from the first fight, physically he may have been the same.

2. 2000-2001 at his absolute best, Morales 1 was his redemption moment, Hamed was his crowning moment, after that he bathed in his glory and dropped off a little. I think he showedhad refinement in Morales 1.

It should be noted 122 suits Barrera better than any other weight. He went to 126 to chase Hamed and to 130 to chase Morales. barrera also fought at his weigh in weight while Morales and Pacquiao dehydrated for the weigh in to add 10-15lbs on fight night

It should also be noted that Pacman 2 and Marquez fights were a hell of allot closer than anyone gives MAB credit for. I had him edging JMM in a very close fight.

I rewatched Marquez vs Barrera the other day and I still can't make a case for MAB.

[PowerPuncher]

I rewatched Marquez vs Barrera the other day and I still can't make a case for MAB.

I can't remember how I scored it and it was 4am here when I watched it so I was a bit tired. I just gave Barrera rounds based on him landing more cleaner shots while Marquez punched gloves and grazed shots.

I did think Barrera was going to get put away until he landed the beautiful KD shot. The ref screwed Barrera by not awarding the KD, yes MAB deserved a point knocking off but that was a beautiful comeback shot and a 10-8 round (minus 1point)

[Addie]

I can't remember how I scored it and it was 4am here when I watched it so I was a bit tired. I just gave Barrera rounds based on him landing more cleaner shots while Marquez punched gloves and grazed shots.

I did think Barrera was going to get put away until he landed the beautiful KD shot. The ref screwed Barrera by not awarding the KD, yes MAB deserved a point knocking off but that was a beautiful comeback shot and a 10-8 round (minus 1point)

I agree.

I had Marquez winning the fight but it was super close. I haven't watched the second Pacquiao fight. Don't wanna see my boy get worked over.