How would you rank Marquez, Barrera & Morales against each other?

Many appear to rank and favour Barrera and Morales over Marquez, however have your opinions changed since Barrera and Morales faded and Marquez continued at a higher level and also has it changed again since Morales effort against Maidana?

Personally I would rank them as follows:

1- Marquez
2- Morales
3- Barrera

I think it's very close between them all plus to me it's more the other 2's styles which favours them above Marquez by many.

Your thoughts?

Barrera
Morales
JMM

for me.

1. Marquez
2. Barrera
3. Morales

For his achievements alone Marquez wins it for me.

Tough question, but good article VC. Have swapped Barrera and Morales around in my head more times than I care to remember, but one thing is for sure; I always have both of them ahead of Marquez.

That's not to diminish Marquez's achievements at all, I think he's a genuine modern great. But I think he suffers from coming on to the scene just a little too late. The Barrea he beat, while still a dangerous fighter, had certainly seen better days, and after that his primary wins are Casamayor (who I certainly do rate, mind you), Diaz and Peden. Not to be scoffed at but in all honesty, unless he beats Pacquiao later this year, I don't think his CV is comparable to Barrera or Morales'.

I also can't forget that both Barrera and Morales were utterly dominant champions at Super-Bantamweight, something which Marquez has never been in any division. Morales, in particular, had an aura about him when at his best that I just don't see with Marquez, and never have.

Right now I'd go for Barrera at the top by the thinnest of margins, Morales next, with Marquez in third. Not much between any of them, but I feel Marquez has no business leading the other two just yet. Come November's fight with Pacquiao, that could change.

Much as I would love to have Morales top as he is one of my absolutely favourite modern fighters can go either way and probably have to have Marco top if only based on their head to head, however on the flip side Erik's win over Manny is probably looking better with time, although would have to say Manny has improved by then it still stands out as a very good win. Although to prove how difficult the debate is could say the same about Barrera's win over Naz.

Personally think for reasons Chris has already outlined am not sure Marquez quite measures up, has never really dominated a division and has some flat performances on his ledger such as Chris John, has logevity on his side but for me he does not really compare to the other two.

Barrera
Morales
Marquez

Don't see how you can have Morales above Barrera when he was 1-2 against him. MAB was also a better all rounder than morales IMO. This subject was discussed not so long ago on the following thread, and I'll stick with what I said on it: https://www.606v2.com/t4075-barrera-king-of-the-mexicans

I dont see the problem having Morales over MAB. Think people overemphasise the narrow 1-2 with Morales as the basis.

Morales is unbeaten at super bantamweight. Holds wins there over the likes of MAB, Zaragoza, Molina, Junior Jones, McCullough. This easily tops MABs super bantamweight reign where he lost to Jones and Morales and has a much inferior list of wins.

MAB has the better record at featherweight. Noteable wins over Morales, Hamed, Kelley and Tapia there. Morales cant match that.

At superfeather its pretty close. MAB beats Morales and Juarez x 2 but Morales in my view edges it with a huge win over Pacquiao and good wins over Jesus Chavez and Hernandez. When you also factor in that MAB lost to Marquez and Pacquiao at SFW and the Morales fight was so close I belive Morales does enough to edge the super featherweight acheivement.

After that its largely irrelevant as both were more or less done.

Overall I have it about as close you can between Morales and MAB with JMM just a fraction behind.

Certainly below lightweight I think Morales and MABs record outstrip JMM comfortably, but JMM overall longetivity and acheivements at Lightweight make it closer.

Morales
MAB
JMM

Fists of Fury wrote:Barrera
Morales
JMM

for me.

Agreed.

Barrera is the guy who beat fighters at their peak. He took Naseems zero and Eriks zero and has been going since 1989. With a career spanning 4 decades and 9 weight classes I think that puts him comfortably at the top of the pile.

Morales is number 2 behind Barrera but above Marquez based on his record. Hes beaten Pacquiao and was a dominant champ in 2 weight classes.

Marquez, Quality fighter but not in the same league as the other two IMO. He only came into the forefront once his countrymen faded. Before that he couldnt compete on their stage. His recent record has some good names on but he hasnt beaten any great prime fighters yet.

Barrera
Morales
Marquez

Barrera beat Marquez when he was shot to bits and was robbed. He would of beat him in his prime, and his fight with Morales in 2000 was epic, however Marco's got the best record for me. Marquez is overrated

Steven_89 wrote:Barrera
Morales
Marquez

Barrera beat Marquez when he was shot to bits and was robbed. He would of beat him in his prime, and his fight with Morales in 2000 was epic, however Marco's got the best record for me. Marquez is overrated

Robbed

I think it's hard to judge if a prime Barrera would beat a prime Marquez. I would edge towards Marquez but it would certainly be a close contest. Also how is Marquez overrated he got robbed against the P4P number 1 and victories against Diaz,Katsidis,Salido,Casamayor,Juarez to go with it.

Do think Marquez lives off the close fights with Pacquiao to some extent and without them his record doesn't come close to comparing with Morales and Barrera who were busy destroying eachothers careers while he was losing to the Norwood and Johns of this world. Not to say he isn't a great fighter which he is but not up there with Barrera or Morales.

Marquez has never been the dominant man at the top of a division the way Morales and Barrera have been. Barrera beat the better opponents of the three. He was the first to beat Morales.

Barrera
Morales
Marquez

Marquez doesnt even come close to Morales and MAB below lightweight which is where they should be judged.

He trumps them on longetivity perhaps and his career above SFW is way better but I honestly see a case for him being rated top of the three.

Extremelly difficult to seperate the other two though.

I think it's hard to judge if a prime Barrera would beat a prime Marquez. I would edge towards Marquez but it would certainly be a close contest. Also how is Marquez overrated he got robbed against the P4P number 1 and victories against Diaz,Katsidis,Salido,Casamayor,Juarez to go with it.
........................
I thought Barrera won the fight, the Pacquiao fights were close, i scored the first for Manny by a round and the second a draw, Pacquiao's improved with moving up, what will you and the others say when Pacquiao destroys him at the catchweight?. PS Yeah, how can he be overrated because i think he gets far,far too much credit, he's a quality fighter who i do rate, but he's overrated. If he beats Pacquiao, i'll rate him a great, if he loses, i'll rate him as a very good fighter. Greats don't get utterly embarassed and battered for 36 minutes like he did with Mayweather though. Duran v Leonard 1? a lightweight fighting at 147, that's my idea of being a great. Marquez is quality but not an ATG.

Steven_89 wrote:I think it's hard to judge if a prime Barrera would beat a prime Marquez. I would edge towards Marquez but it would certainly be a close contest. Also how is Marquez overrated he got robbed against the P4P number 1 and victories against Diaz,Katsidis,Salido,Casamayor,Juarez to go with it.
........................
I thought Barrera won the fight, the Pacquiao fights were close, i scored the first for Manny by a round and the second a draw, Pacquiao's improved with moving up, what will you and the others say when Pacquiao destroys him at the catchweight?. PS Yeah, how can he be overrated because i think he gets far,far too much credit, he's a quality fighter who i do rate, but he's overrated. If he beats Pacquiao, i'll rate him a great, if he loses, i'll rate him as a very good fighter. Greats don't get utterly embarassed and battered for 36 minutes like he did with Mayweather though. Duran v Leonard 1? a lightweight fighting at 147, that's my idea of being a great. Marquez is quality but not an ATG.

You clearly dont rate him. You picked Mitchell and Katsidas to beat him about a year ago.

You clearly dont rate him. You picked Mitchell and Katsidas to beat him about a year ago.
.................................................
I clearly don't rate him hahahaha, do us a favour and don't make my mind up for me. I thought Mitchell and Katsidis could beat him because of his age. KEVIN MITCHELL WOULD NOT BEAT MARQUEZ, no way. I thought a style like Katsidis' would cause him problems, and did it? YES, did he drop him? YES. I've always rated Marquez, i've clearly just said he's overrated, about a year ago.

Steven_89 wrote:You clearly dont rate him. You picked Mitchell and Katsidas to beat him about a year ago.
.................................................
I clearly don't rate him hahahaha, do us a favour and don't make my mind up for me. I thought Mitchell and Katsidis could beat him because of his age. KEVIN MITCHELL WOULD NOT BEAT MARQUEZ, no way. I thought a style like Katsidis' would cause him problems, and did it? YES, did he drop him? YES. I've always rated Marquez, i've clearly just said he's overrated, about a year ago.

How highly can you rate the guy if you tipped Mitchell or Katsidas to beat him? Seriously?

A quick scan through your posts would suggest otherwise, easier just to admit what we all already know

A quick scan through your posts would suggest otherwise, easier just to admit what we all already know
................
go on your witchunt and get the posts lol? i've always said he's overrated and he is imo. I know you love a good conspiracy and love to disagree to cause conflict, but feel free, get up where i've said i don't rate him. I've always said i think he's overrated which i do, and that Mitchell could of beat him and Katsidis, obviously now i don't think that, but Mitchell and Katsidis are no Morales. PS I don't need to admit nothing to you, you mean nothing in the world lol, hardly bert sugar are ya.

Sit back and watch him hang himself again

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Sit back and watch him hang himself again

Who brought Valero into this (sorry)

Sit back and watch him hang himself again
..........................................
I'm lost, bit sick that however haha

Watching you go off on one all the time is quite funny

Watching you go off on one all the time is quite funny
....................
HAHAHA, no i'm soundo pal, i mean i just suggested you get up where i said i don't rate Marquez, bang on me though i don't 'go off on one' behind a PC, i don't have your vast array of arsenal in battle behind a keyboard, last thing i need's a left jab to the monitor off someone as good as you.

Steven_89: Greats don't get utterly embarassed and battered for 36 minutes like he did with Mayweather though.
------
Like Cotto did for most of the fight with Pacquiao? Or mosley did against mayweather?

Also, it's wrong to compare Marquez moving up to 147 against floyd with Duran moving up to 147 against SRL. Duran was a big lightweight who would eventually go on to fight at middleweight, Marquez is a career feather who didn't even move up to lightweight until he was 35 years old.

Marquez is a great fighter, his career has been a slow burner - he was virtually a journeyman for the first ten years of it, his style being too technical and unexciting to appeal to the masses - or even his own Mexican countrymen who preferred MAB and Morales. He stuck at it, made his style more exciting, beat MAB, Juarez, beat pacquiao first time for me by a point and did the business at 135. I don't see why some are saying we can't include his LW career when comparing him to MAB and morales, that detracts from Marquez longevity and the fact that unlike MAB and Erik he was effective above 130.

Like Cotto did for most of the fight with Pacquiao? Or mosley did against mayweather?
..........................
Cotto outboxed Pacquiao early and was in the fight, he was utterly battered. Mosley is shot to bits, lets not mince our words and should never of been handpicked off Pacquiao as well after Mayweather. Mosley has beat great fighters in de la Hoya TWICE, destroyed the dangerous plasterer Margarito, he was finished and is now.

Marquez is a great fighter,
...........................................
No, he's not.

Mosley was 'destroyed' twice by Forrest and Wright so using your logic he can't be a great, did he also really beat De La Hoya twice, the second fight for instance should really a NC.
Cotto marginally outboxed Pacquiao for a mere round before he was put down and the fight was effectively over

Steven_89 wrote:Marquez is a great fighter,
...........................................
No, he's not.

Yes he is.

Steven_89 wrote:Like Cotto did for most of the fight with Pacquiao? Or mosley did against mayweather?
..........................
Cotto outboxed Pacquiao early and was in the fight, he was utterly battered. Mosley is shot to bits, lets not mince our words and should never of been handpicked off Pacquiao as well after Mayweather. Mosley has beat great fighters in de la Hoya TWICE, destroyed the dangerous plasterer Margarito, he was finished and is now.

Cotto outboxed pacquiao in the first, he then proceeded to lose every round and get decked twice. He also quit against margarito. Is that the sign of a great fighter?

Mosley beat Oscar while on illegal steroids, and Cotto took a pasting from Pacquiao after the first few rounds. Unlike JMM vs Mayweather though, Cotto was the supposed bigger guy against Pacquiao. I'd say Marquez took less of a battering from Mayweather, given that he was down once and went the distance. Cotto on the other hand yo-yo'd and was stopped against Pacquiao. Marquez isn't over-rated.

. I'd say Marquez took less of a battering from Mayweather, given that he was down once and went the distance. Cotto on the other hand yo-yo'd and was stopped against Pacquiao. Marquez isn't over-rated.
..................
Cotto tried to win the fight, he was in the fight and throwing punches. Marquez v Mayweather was embarassing, a great finds ways to compete, i don;t know why Mosley was slated for the Pacquiao fight and he wasnt for the Mayweather fight, that was shocking, pitiful he got beat up all night and never competed, existed. Don't compare him to Cotto, who has beat much better opponents than him, he outboxed Mosley, destroyed Torres, Malignaggi, Quintana, Foreman, etc. He has beat guys who went on to win world titles, Cotto has moved up as well, why hasn't Marquez gone above lightweight to fight a young hungry lion like Bradley? oh i forgot, he'll get a pasting!

Dont know why people entertain this. The guy picked Mitchell and Katsidas to beat Marquez. This is what you are up against.

May aswell try convince D4 that Mayweather is better than Pacquiao, or HMS that Calzaghe was a better SMW to Jones.

Cotto outboxed pacquiao in the first, he then proceeded to lose every round and get decked twice. He also quit against margarito. Is that the sign of a great fighter?
.........................
No he never quit, absolute bull. I don't need someone who's never had a fight or laced up a glove in their life trying to tell me a warrior quit. You've been listening to fat buncey aint you? he was floored then met by his cornerman in the ring, he then fought for well over half the fight with Clottey with a terrible cut and proceeded to outwork him late on. Cotto's miles, miles better than Marquez, who would of won if they fought a year ago at WW? Cotto would of destroyed him, then you'd of said 'Marquez isn't big enough' BORING, Pacquiao moved up.

Dont know why people entertain this. The guy picked Mitchell and Katsidas to beat Marquez. This is what you are up against.

May aswell try convince D4 that Mayweather is better than Pacquiao, or HMS that Calzaghe was a better SMW to Jones
...................
'Up against', erm no, i accept opinions, unlike you. When we have a genuine keyboard veteran calling someone a quitter it's baffling. Marquez was embarassing in the Mayweather fight, he got a big fight and ( EDIT ). Erm i clearly said at the time Marquez isnt getting younger and Diaz caused him nightmares so either guy could beat him. I then admitted i was wrong, i look forward to hearing your views on Marquez when he ( EDIT ) up again in a big fight against the best fighter of the past 30 years IMO. Peace out

Well Marquez is a former featherweight fighting at Lightweight whereas Cotto was a former light Welterweight fighting at Welterweight so of course he would have won if the two faced off but i'm failing to see the relevance or is this you using double standards again?

Steven_89 wrote:Dont know why people entertain this. The guy picked Mitchell and Katsidas to beat Marquez. This is what you are up against.

May aswell try convince D4 that Mayweather is better than Pacquiao, or HMS that Calzaghe was a better SMW to Jones
...................
'Up against', erm no, i accept opinions, unlike you. When we have a genuine keyboard veteran calling someone a quitter it's baffling. Marquez was embarassing in the Mayweather fight, he got a big fight and ( EDIT ) .Erm i clearly said at the time Marquez isnt getting younger and Diaz caused him nightmares so either guy could beat him. I then admitted i was wrong, i look forward to hearing your views on Marquez when he ( EDIT ) again in a big fight against the best fighter of the past 30 years IMO. Peace out

Think someone gonna be in trouble with the admin tea after that, will be a shame to see you gone though

Think someone gonna be in trouble with the admin tea after that, will be a shame to see you gone though
.....................
Nah, i think i'll be orite, report it though if you want. Im not the one refusing opinions, nice to see you stairing things up, well trying to though. Time on your hands.net! hahahahah

Steven _89 thinks Cotto is one of the greatest fighters of this generation but Marquez is overrated, even though they've beaten a fairly similar level of opposition, both multi weight champs and both fallen slightly short against the very elite. They have one common opponent - pacquiao - whom Marquez performed immeasurably better against than Cotto. Marquez has also never quit against anyone.

Why should Marquez fight Cotto at ww? He's clearly clearly the much smaller man, a career fw who moved up to lw aged 35. How'd you know I've never had a fight or laced em up Steven? You know nothing about me You need to calm down pal, what you gonna do start offering everyone out on here like on the old 606 you numpty?

Well Marquez is a former featherweight fighting at Lightweight whereas Cotto was a former light Welterweight fighting at Welterweight so of course he would have won if the two faced off but i'm failing to see the relevance or is this you using double standards again?
.................................
Cotto moved up from WW to destroy a good LMW champ on the back of a devestating defeat, greats move up. I dont use them, as i said clearly why's it different a shot Mosley being boood against Pac Man, when Marquez who obviously has plenty left embarasses the sport and himself against Mayweather, he should'a been boooo'd.

Steven_89 wrote:Think someone gonna be in trouble with the admin tea after that, will be a shame to see you gone though
.....................
Nah, i think i'll be orite, report it though if you want. Im not the one refusing opinions, nice to see you stairing things up, well trying to though. Time on your hands.net! hahahahah

Ah diddums, comedy isn't your strong suit is it, I give my opinion without resorting to insults or swearing but carry on boy, humour me some more

Time to cool off guys, thread locked for 'chill out' period.

Steven_89 wrote:Dont know why people entertain this. The guy picked Mitchell and Katsidas to beat Marquez. This is what you are up against.

May aswell try convince D4 that Mayweather is better than Pacquiao, or HMS that Calzaghe was a better SMW to Jones
...................
'Up against', erm no, i accept opinions, unlike you. When we have a genuine keyboard veteran calling someone a quitter it's baffling. Marquez was embarassing in the Mayweather fight, he got a big fight and fu**ed up. DEAL WITH IT! ....Erm i clearly said at the time Marquez isnt getting younger and Diaz caused him nightmares so either guy could beat him. I then admitted i was wrong, i look forward to hearing your views on Marquez when he fu**s up again in a big fight against the best fighter of the past 30 years IMO. Peace out

It would be nice if you could actually articulate yourself for a change. Yes you are old enough to swear and clever enough to add some astericks ot bypass the swaer filter. You have been notified about this before. Consider this a warning. It is not needed or neccessary. Cut it out.

Thread unlocked.
Play nice guys and stop the silly bickering.
We are adults here, so lets start acting like it otherwise im waking Hobo up and getting him here with his shotgun. (not a pretty sight)

Keep it on topic.

YI

I got my Ned Kelly costume on YI, i'm safe

Steven_89 - for the record I don't think Cotto quit or is a quitter, but I know the suggestion of it enrages you, which is a strike back when you're being unnecessarily arsey with other posters. Cotto's a great fighter, I prefer Marquez. That's that, my last input on this thread, not much else to say without it descending into the same arguement.

Morales
Marquez
Barrera

Tough one between Morales and Barrera, for now i'll go with,

Morales
Barrera
Marquez

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I got my Ned Kelly costume on YI, i'm safe

Again?

Steven_89 - for the record I don't think Cotto quit or is a quitter, but I know the suggestion of it enrages you, which is a strike back when you're being unnecessarily arsey with other posters. Cotto's a great fighter, I prefer Marquez. That's that, my last input on this thread, not much else to say without it descending into the same arguement.
.................................
Doesn't enrage me, 'being arsey', no unnecessarily 'NOT AGREEING' with you offends you. I'm not rising to your bait, end of.