Why MORALES ranks higher than BARRERA

[George W Hedge]

1stly...
The head to head score is a myth... I have it 2-0-1 to morales.
I have morales taking a 7-5 rds win in their 1st epic, I admit, a lot of rds were close but erik was the busier fighter while mab was content to attack in short bursts.... for the record, the rds I gave to each boxer are....
Morales... 4,5,6,7,9,10 & 11.......... mab 1,2,3,8 & 12.

2nd fight... morales wins 8-3-1
morales rds... 1,2,4,5,7,8,10 & 11........ mab 6,9 & 12.... rd3 even.

3rd fight.... 6-6 in rds
morales... 2,4,7,8,11 & 12........ mab 1,3,5,6,9 & 10.

The 1st & 3rd fights were super close & they recieved 1 each, that evens itself out but the 2nd fight was a disgusting robbery as erik outboxed him throughout, anybody who says different should stop watching boxing NOW.

Also.... entertainment aside (erik wins this hands down) I dont believe mab has ever beaten anyone that morales wouldnt beat were as erik has beat guys that would give mab hell or beat him (jones, pacquiao, chavez & to a lesser extent Hernandez.)

So, my view is that Morales edges the head to head & has also had the better career victories... Id also give the edge to erik in heart, boxing skills, chin & warriors spirit.

Cheers.
:good

[Shake]

You just like Morales better and have tailored an argument around your preference.

[Stewbear]

I also think Morales won two out of the three fights, though they all proved they are neck and neck in accomplishments too.
Currently I guess would place Morales just above Barrera, though this could change if Barrera beat Pacman.

[Senya13]

Morales deserved the win in the 3rd fight, hands down. It was nothing even that close, IMHO, he should have been ahead by 2 to 4 points. More active, more punches (despite the bullshit Compubox made up, they didn't just count the punches that landed wrong, they added Barrera a lot of non-existing punches too), and hitting Barrera more cleanly and harder.

[Robbi]

Morales deserved the win in the 3rd fight, hands down. It was nothing even that close, IMHO, he should have been ahead by 2 to 4 points. More active, more punches (despite the bullshit Compubox made up, they didn't just count the punches that landed wrong, they added Barrera a lot of non-existing punches too), and hitting Barrera more cleanly and harder.

I have Barrera 2-1. He won the first fight no question. And the 3rd fight as well.

Barrera owns Morales in the trilogy.

[LeedsLad]

I thought Barrera won the first, Morales won the second and Barrera certainly won the third.

[Senya13]

Barrera won the 1st? You are totally crazy. Morales was a LOT more active, MUCH-MUCH better clean punching, better defense, better ring generalship, in almost all rounds of the fight.

[LeedsLad]

Barrera won the 1st? You are totally crazy. Morales was a LOT more active, MUCH-MUCH better clean punching, better defense, better ring generalship, in almost all rounds of the fight.
Barrera edged the first, Morales edged the second and Barrera won the third fairly clearly.

I still like Morales more, and rank him higher than Barrera regardless. Barrerea did the smarter thing and became more of a boxer in latter years of his career, however i prefer Morales for sticking to the entertaining, toe to toe style he always had.

Junior Jones beat Barrera twice, and just 18 months later Morales destroyed Jones. The other opponents they had in common they both beat equally convincingly. Outside of there fights with each other, Barrera's big win is Hamed, whereas Morales's big win is Pacquiao. IMO Morales win over Pac was a greater achievement, and therefore he deserves the higher rank.

[Sweet Science]

They were both great champions and true warriors who have repeatedly proved their worth. I have difficulty separting the two in terms of ranking. However, I find Morales' uncompromising and aggressive style is more pleasing to the eye.

[Senya13]

Barrera could not edge out the first by staying passive 80% of time and taking a thorough beating, showing just how lower in class he is as a boxer than Morales. Waking up for 20 seconds at the end of the round and landing several punches doesn't win you a round, even more so the fight.

[jyuza]

First time I saw the trilogy I scored it 0-0-3.

[sweet_scientist]

First time I saw the trilogy I scored it 0-0-3.

:lol: Same here! I've intended to go back and rewatch and rescore them but never have.

[jyuza]

:lol: Same here! I've intended to go back and rewatch and rescore them but never have.
Did you ? Just when I thought I would read some hated post in response of mine, I was ready for this :yep

I never rewatched them either... I had to much fights to watch afterward.

[Robbi]

Barrera won the 1st? You are totally crazy. Morales was a LOT more active, MUCH-MUCH better clean punching, better defense, better ring generalship, in almost all rounds of the fight.

No, you are totally crazy. I think opinion is so far from the truth that your having a laugh.

Morales better defense in the first fight?. You really are the joker of the pack on this thread.

[Senya13]

Keep a mental count of punches one and the other land during the round, rather than watch just the final spurt of Barrera trying to steal the round. Morales is using latteral movement, body movement, parrying and blocking most of the punches during the round and only gets hit with several punches in the end usually, but only after he landed several tens more punches on his own during the previous 2.5 minutes.

[PowerPuncher]

You have to weigh up the following

MAB definately beat Morales at least 2 times despite Morales typically weighing 10lbs more than MAB in the ring

MAB beat Hamed and MkKinney, who are better than anyone Morales fought outside of MAB/Pacman

Morales beat Pacman and Junior Jones who both beat MAB.

They are both great fighters and very close but I rate MAB above Morales, he got the better of the series, and beat Hamed

[Senya13]

Just because blind judges stole two wins from Morales, doesn't make Barrera better than Morales.

[Drew101]

At 122lbs, I give Morales the edge, based on accomplishments at the weight. I scored the first fight for MAB, but it was only by a single point, so it hardly qualifies as highway robbery.

At 126lbs, I give the edge to MAB, simply because he, by and large, did better work against a higher quality of opponent. Irondically, I scored the second fight to Morales, by a 7-5 margin.

At 130lbs, it's a toss-up. Both fighters were able to partially unify, and a lot of my decision will depend upon how MAB fares against Pacquiao in the rematch. Head to head in the rubber match, by the way, I gave Barerra the edge, and, really, the best that Morales could have done that evening was a draw on my card. He just gave away too many of the early rounds.

So, I think these two are pretty much equal, both in terms of their head-to-head matchups, and in terms of their accomplishments, as well.

[Robbi]

Just because blind judges stole two wins from Morales, doesn't make Barrera better than Morales.


Your a Morales nuthugger. I'm probably not the only one who sees it.

[Senya13]

I'm a 4-scoring criterias nuthugger. Ie I don't allow attempts to steal the round overule the work one fighter has done the rest of the round. There's absolutely no way Barrera deserved a win in the 1st fight. All 4 criteria were in favor of Morales in most rounds of the fight. Anyone who scored it otherwise is not sticking to standard criterias of scoring a fight.

[brooklyn1550]

I have it 2-1 Barrera. He won the 1st and 3rd fight in my opinion.

[sweet_scientist]

The thing about the first Morales-Barrera fight was that Morales was landing more and applying the pressure, but he was being hurt by Barrera's punches more than he was hurting Barrera. It's always hard in such situations to decide who is getting the best of it.

[Senya13]

It's not like Morales was landing pity-pat punches either, he was landing a lot of clean hard punches that were staggering Barrera too. And the quantity of punches he landed during the round was such, that even if Barrera landed a couple of punches that hurt him, they were still not enough to push the scales toward Barrera. When you have fighter A convincingly dominating fighter B for 2:50 and then even if you had fighter A knocked down at the end, I'd still give the round either a 10-10 or only a 10-9 to fighter B.
Here's how Kazmarek describes such situation:
Occasionally there may be a round where the fighter who was knocked down was dominating the round before the knockdown and makes a strong recovery after the knockdown. He could narrow the gap 10 - 9. Much depends on the impact of the knockdown punch and the time elapsed. Remember---anything can happen in a fight! There are occasions where one fighter may totally dominate his opponent, having hurt him badly, and be on the verge of a knockout only to be the victim of a flash knockdown himself. Unhurt, he gets up, takes the mandatory 8-count, and continues to bombard his foe until the round ends. He could indeed win the round 10 - 9.

[sweet_scientist]

It's not like Morales was landing pity-pat punches either, he was landing a lot of clean hard punches that were staggering Barrera too. And the quantity of punches he landed during the round was such, that even if Barrera landed a couple of punches that hurt him, they were still not enough to push the scales toward Barrera. When you have fighter A convincingly dominating fighter B for 2:50 and then even if you had fighter A knocked down at the end, I'd still give the round either a 10-10 or only a 10-9 to fighter B.
Here's how Kazmarek describes such situation:

Morales was definitely landing decent shots from what I remember, good hard shots, but Barrera was taking them well. Barrera was throwing sporadically, but when he did he'd shake Morales up. Morales would then get re-energized and try to re-seize control of the fight by thorwing even more punches.

I can't give you specifics about the fight, because it's not fresh in my memory, but I do have my scorecard form it and I had a couple of even rounds in there. Perhaps they came in situations like I said, with Morales landing more, and then Barrera shaking Erik up.

At the end of the day it depends on how much store you put on being stunned or rocked by punches compared to good hard punches which don''t quite have the same effect.

[Robbi]

I thought Barrera showed much better defense than Morales in their first fight, and he was landing more clean power punches. Some close rounds, and a very competitive fight. It was a very high paced affair, which are pretty hard to score at times. But Barrera was better in all areas than Morales.

Most people agree Barrera won the fight.

[Senya13]

Barrera's punches might have staggered Erik somewhat, but in the end they didn't wear him down to the point of being stopped, they weren't hard or effective enough to, say, predict that Morales would be stopped had the fight been scheduled for 15 rounds, or had the bell not sounded in any of the rounds where Barrera's punches hurt Morales somewhat. If you understand what I mean. And during the rounds Morales wasn't just landing more, he was landing A LOT more than Barrera. I would estimate it to 10-40 punches in most rounds.

[Robbi]

Barrera's punches might have staggered Erik somewhat, but in the end they didn't wear him down to the point of being stopped, they weren't hard or effective enough to, say, predict that Morales would be stopped had the fight been scheduled for 15 rounds, or had the bell not sounded in any of the rounds where Barrera's punches hurt Morales somewhat. If you understand what I mean. And during the rounds Morales wasn't just landing more, he was landing A LOT more than Barrera. I would estimate it to 10-40 punches in most rounds.

You having a laugh?

[Senya13]

What much better defense? The only times Barrera was landing was in short spurts, where he'd land cleanly 2-3 punches and miss all the rest. Now compare that to Morales landing at will during the round TENS of punches. Then there's the skills each one was using for defense. Morales was using all kinds of defense, lateral movement (his footwork was brilliant, the way he came at Barrera or from Barrera at different angles), body movement, parry, blocking. Barrera was mostly using static block, covering himself up and just hoping that Morales' punches won't penetrate it (but they did get through a LOT). The advantage in defensive skills belonged to Morales both in quantity and quality.

[Senya13]

You having a laugh?
Of course not. I watched the fight again like a couple of weeks ago, so my memories about it are still fresh.

[Quick Cash]

On my card I had Barrera winning the first solely because of an erroneously called knockdown in the 12th and final round. It was a bad call but an impartial judge has to go with the referees decision.
114-113 Barrera

In the second fight of the series, Morales started stronger, but Barrera looked fresher and stronger down the stretch. The middle rounds were back and forth. Barrera rallied strong from the 11th round on but was unable to sway the early lead. Round 2 was even 10-10.
115-114 Morales

I have to rewatch the third. When I watched it last I had Morales winning by a wide margin, but in previous I had always scored it oppositely for Marco Antonio. This most recent one will go down in paper this time and will be my official record of the rubbermatch. :good

[CASH_718]

Barrera CLEARLY won the third fight. It was clear as day NO ONE can change that.

Barrera won the first Morales the 2nd and then Barrera the third.

[Nigel_Benn]

Barrera won the 3rd clearly i think it was this fight were the ring wars were starting to take there toll on Erik and also he didnt focus as much on this fight cus he believed he would knock Barrera out after he was destroryed by Pacquaio.

[PowerPuncher]

People forget MORALES HAS NEVER BEEN A LINEAR OR UNDISPUTED CHAMPION IN ANY DIVISION!!!!!!!!!

Barrera has at 126.

[George W Hedge]

People forget MORALES HAS NEVER BEEN A LINEAR OR UNDISPUTED CHAMPION IN ANY DIVISION!!!!!!!!!

Barrera has at 126.

Both morales & barrera have managed to be ranked no1 in 3 weight divisions....

barrera was the no1 122 lb boxer until the junior jones fight
morales was the no1 122lb boxer since the junior jones fight until he moved up to 126 & imo edges wilfredo gomez as the best 122 lber ever

barrera became the no1 126 lber by beating hamed
morales became the best 126 lber by (realistically) beating barrera

barrera became the no1 130 lber by beating morales
morales became the best 130 lber by unifying vs hernandez


All in all, morales beat the better boxers, was more exciting & won 2-0-1 in the head to heads.

erik also tried his last fading hand at lwt before retiring. he was way past his prime & could have easily got the verdict.

morales tops barrera in most categories.

:good

[TIGEREDGE]

You just like Morales better and have tailored an argument around your preference.

GREAT STATEMENT

[TIGEREDGE]

I don't know how anyone could give the first fight to morales.it was like bowe holyfield one in which the loser (being morales) fought great but got clearly beaten

second fight was morales. third fight was MAB

[LeedsLad]

The first 2 fights were close, but i thought the third was a CLEAR win for Barrera.

[Nemesis]

Anyone who scored the 2nd fight for Barrera needs there eyes testing, he was soundly being outboxed and when Morales knocked him down with a body shot the ref decided not to count it. Although i would rank Barrera higher

[PowerPuncher]

Both morales & barrera have managed to be ranked no1 in 3 weight divisions....

barrera was the no1 122 lb boxer until the junior jones fight
morales was the no1 122lb boxer since the junior jones fight until he moved up to 126 & imo edges wilfredo gomez as the best 122 lber ever

barrera became the no1 126 lber by beating hamed
morales became the best 126 lber by (realistically) beating barrera

barrera became the no1 130 lber by beating morales
morales became the best 130 lber by unifying vs hernandez


All in all, morales beat the better boxers, was more exciting & won 2-0-1 in the head to heads.

erik also tried his last fading hand at lwt before retiring. he was way past his prime & could have easily got the verdict.

morales tops barrera in most categories.

:good

Woulda Shoula Coulda

Your avoiding the point that Morales was never a Undispured/Linear Champ.

At 122 Bungu had the best case for being No1 (beating Mkkinney twice pre-Barrera) until he moved up to face Hamed.

At 126 Morales didn't achieve anything other than having a close fight with linear champ Barrera - it was very close and I had it to Barrera at the time

At 130 he purposely avoided moving too until Freitas/Cassa/Corales/Mayweather left and the division was 1 of the weakest. He beat 2 paper champs and then clearly lost to Barrera. His win against Pacman was a great 1 but his next 3 losses were the end.

At 135 he took 1 of the weakest paper champions P4P and went close but lost taking a beating in the late rounds - he could have won but beating David Diaz doesn't mean anything anyway

Barrera beat Morales 2-1 in most peoples cards and the 1s that counted. Some such as myself have it Barrera 3-0. Both Barrera and Morales would not be as big without each other

[George W Hedge]

morales & mab would have been legends without each other but I agree they are what they are because of the rivalry (the best rivalry in boxing history imo)

I give mab all due respect, he gave prime morales his hardest fight (the 1st fight) but I honestly feel that the 2-1 scoreline is rather untrue.

I have watched all 3 fights many times & the only clear victory for either man was the 2nd fight for morales.
Anybody who knows me knows that erik is my fav boxer but Im definetely not in the habit of making up false shit just to suit myself, if I truly felt that mab beat morales I would write it down, otherwise Id lose any sort of respect Ive managed to build here on esb.

I wont argue until Im blue in the face if you want to give mab the 1st & 3rd fights as long as you (as I do) admit that they were 2 very competitive fights that had no real loser & could have gone either way but if any of you try & say mab won the 2nd fight or won the other 2 by a large margin... then I have nothing more to say to you because your boxing judgment isnt up to the standards of the sort of person I expect to speak with on esb.

I will say again... morales is a better fighter than barrera & the only thing Id hand mab over erik is longevity which is why mab gets boo`s quite a lot because of his cautious style when the fans know that he knows how to go to war & be exciting but just wont do it.

When all is said & done, I think morales will be the 1 with his head held highest havingh no regrets.

viva el terrible

:good

[acb]

I have to shake my head at those of you who have Morrales winning the 3rd fight. :patsch

He was a beaten man in that fight, hell he wasnt even prepared and you could see it on his face in the later rounds.

[George W Hedge]

I have to shake my head at those of you who have Morrales winning the 3rd fight. :patsch

He was a beaten man in that fight, hell he wasnt even prepared and you could see it on his face in the later rounds.

morales did look gassed early on in that fight & gave away stupid rds, he badly underestimated how good mab could be at 130 but I still had him winning 6 rds so even if you give mab that fight you must realise how close it was, surely.

:good

[PowerPuncher]

morales & mab would have been legends without each other but I agree they are what they are because of the rivalry (the best rivalry in boxing history imo)

I give mab all due respect, he gave prime morales his hardest fight (the 1st fight) but I honestly feel that the 2-1 scoreline is rather untrue.

I have watched all 3 fights many times & the only clear victory for either man was the 2nd fight for morales.
Anybody who knows me knows that erik is my fav boxer but Im definetely not in the habit of making up false shit just to suit myself, if I truly felt that mab beat morales I would write it down, otherwise Id lose any sort of respect Ive managed to build here on esb.

I wont argue until Im blue in the face if you want to give mab the 1st & 3rd fights as long as you (as I do) admit that they were 2 very competitive fights that had no real loser & could have gone either way but if any of you try & say mab won the 2nd fight or won the other 2 by a large margin... then I have nothing more to say to you because your boxing judgment isnt up to the standards of the sort of person I expect to speak with on esb.

I will say again... morales is a better fighter than barrera & the only thing Id hand mab over erik is longevity which is why mab gets boo`s quite a lot because of his cautious style when the fans know that he knows how to go to war & be exciting but just wont do it.

When all is said & done, I think morales will be the 1 with his head held highest havingh no regrets.

viva el terrible

:good

Morales is certainly 1 of your faves. Maybe you weren't biased viewing the fights but I'm sure as a fan of Morales you prefered his work. Thats 1 of the subjective things about judging - taking 1 power shot over a few pitter patter punches, a few accurate over many less accurate blows, a straight over a hook (or vice versa), or simply the assumption 1 fighters work is better.

It was a great rivalry - greatest in history? Not in my opinion - Langford-Wills, Ali-Frazier, SRR-LaMotta, Holyfield-Bowe, Leonard-Duran all take some beating.

:good

[Raging B(_)LL]

About the three Morales/Barrera fights, I had Erik winning their first two meetings, by margins of 8-4 and 7-5 in rounds respectively, and the 3rd bout I scored for MAB 7-4-1.

I agree with Senya13 about the first bout, Marco landed the more meaningful punches that had the more telling effect, but they were few and far between whereas Erik outpunched and outlanded Marco by a margin of about three to one, and did so for the whole bout.

The second bout was only marginally closer, and while not an outright robbery I still think Marco got a gift from the judges in the sense that since many people felt he should have gotten the nod in their first bout (which I never agreed with), perhaps the judges were more partial to him in the rematch because of the controversy surrounding the decision in their first meeting.

Their third bout saw Erik falling behind early, mounting a rally in the later rounds, but ultimately falling short as he could not overcome the deficit he incurred in the first half of the fight. I agree with those posters who thought that Erik likely underestimated MAB going into the bout, due to his blowout loss to Pacquaio previously.

As for who ranks higher between the two men, I hesitate to say at this point because while Erik is now retired (at least I hope he is), MAB is still active and has what could be a career defining bout for him coming up against his conqueror Manny Pacquiao in October.

At this moment, I have Erik ahead but only by a C-hair, but that could all change should Marco defeat Pacman in their return. Either way, both men are near equals both in terms of accomplishments and head to head, and I will reserve final judgement until both MAB and Erik are retired for keeps.

[Senya13]

Barrera beat Morales 2-1 in most peoples cards
Bullshit.

[divac]

I had Barrera being just a tad more effective and winning a close fight in fight one.

Morales imo dominated the 2nd fight and won hands down going away.

The third fight I scored a draw.



Its worthy to note that in each of the 3 fights, Morales imo was losing steam toward the end.

I had the trilogy even 1-1-1. I think Morales is the better fighter.
Had it not been for a stamina issue, Morales imo would have taken each of the 3 fights!