Printable View
Great post and I agree entirely although in fairness I dont really think that the poster "elterriblemorales" beileves what he is saying about Barrera- Khan. I just think its abit of back and forth banter we have been exchanging for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Funny how this thread turned into a shitfest on two of the finest...but not knowing to much about the previous generations I say jmm
Yeah I apologise for that but once me and elterrible get started we are like 2 dogs fighting over a bone. I have great respect for both legends and post silly things for a reaction and provoke him into doing the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by armin
If so then fair enough, but it annoys me to hear anyone talk up Khan's win over Barrera as anything significant. Pacquiao okay, but Khan? Not in a million years. No fighter winning in such a way should receive any credit. It was a farce.Quote:
Originally Posted by GAMEGreat post and I agree entirely although in fairness I dont really think that the poster "elterriblemorales" beileves what he is saying about Barrera- Khan. I just think its abit of back and forth banter we have been exchanging for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Absolutley. I was there that night in Manchester and we all walked out of the MEN in disgust. If you saw ringside last night you'll see that Barrera is still annoyed by that corrupt officiating ( Dave Paris is the same ref who let Chisora bite an opponent and didnt even take a point so what did we expect ) Im seeing Barrera later today and will ask him if he will do one more over here for his British fans to erase the memory of that total farce in 09.Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfIf so then fair enough, but it annoys me to hear anyone talk up Khan's win over Barrera as anything significant. Pacquiao okay, but Khan? Not in a million years. No fighter winning in such a way should receive any credit. It was a farce.Quote:
Originally Posted by GAMEGreat post and I agree entirely although in fairness I dont really think that the poster "elterriblemorales" beileves what he is saying about Barrera- Khan. I just think its abit of back and forth banter we have been exchanging for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Sanchez or Lopez.
Just because somebody didn't box in a 'classical boxing' style, it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be considered technical boxers.
He wasn't Mexican, but for example ..... Roberto Duran wasn't a 'boxer', but he had very very underrated boxing skills and his technique was solid as a rock. Barerra was a boxer/puncher who always got involved in wars ...... but the reason he wiped the floor with Naz was because his boxing technique was superior and it didnt buckle under pressure. Same for Chavez - he was a 'Mexican' fighter and he really redefined that genre - but everything he did was built of solid, professional and well trained high-discipline technique.
I'd agree that sanchez was the more recognised STYLIST, but arguably Chavez and Barrera are also up there for their boxing skills.
Thank you!Quote:
Originally Posted by X
fought the very best, no padding what so ever. JMM numero uno!
Juan Manuel Marquez.. Not only is he the greatest Mexican to ever lace em up but he's on that level with the Sugar Rays...
You may have a point about Barrera and Morales being more versatile than Marquez, although it doesn't hold a lot of water when used to contrast the three imo. The only opponent whose style Marquez was truly unable to handle was Mayweathers at welterweight; I see no way Morales or Barrera would've really given a better account of themselves there. A fact that people like to overlook is that JMM is actually the oldest of the three and is only still around because he has much better craft than either of the others did. Physically he is just as shopworn as the other two men, no idea why this gets downplayed really.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny
Both Barrera and Morales had way longer amateur careers. Longevity is not mainly about age. Think a little harder, what other outside style fighters has Marquez done well against? While JMM is certain a master against the come forward fighters with all guts, Barrera and Morales proved they can technically handle the style. Barrera took Naz apart which is one of the reasons he ranked so high on the all time P4P lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingYou may have a point about Barrera and Morales being more versatile than Marquez, although it doesn't hold a lot of water when used to contrast the three imo. The only opponent whose style Marquez was truly unable to handle was Mayweathers at welterweight; I see no way Morales or Barrera would've really given a better account of themselves there. A fact that people like to overlook is that JMM is actually the oldest of the three and is only still around because he has much better craft than either of the others did. Physically he is just as shopworn as the other two men, no idea why this gets downplayed really.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny
I'd have no idea about Marquez' amatuer career; but even so I'd still mantain that his longevity as opposed to the other two can only be due to his craft. Barrera and Morales never beat top opponents once their reflexes started going, theres no real way to compare the men in this manner without giving JMM an edge. And while Marquez indeed isn't suited to face pure boxers, you can hardly claim Barrera has fared any better against come forward guys, having lost twice in his prime to Junior Jones and being obliterated by Pacquiao. Those were arguably the two best punchers he ever faced. I don't see how Naz is really a good benchmark either, especially given the form he was in facing Barrera. He was about as handy an outside fighter as Brandon Rios on that night, can't imagine Marquez or Morales wouldn't have done a similar number on that fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnnyBoth Barrera and Morales had way longer amateur careers. Longevity is not mainly about age. Think a little harder, what other outside style fighters has Marquez done well against? While JMM is certain a master against the come forward fighters with all guts, Barrera and Morales proved they can technically handle the style. Barrera took Naz apart which is one of the reasons he ranked so high on the all time P4P lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingYou may have a point about Barrera and Morales being more versatile than Marquez, although it doesn't hold a lot of water when used to contrast the three imo. The only opponent whose style Marquez was truly unable to handle was Mayweathers at welterweight; I see no way Morales or Barrera would've really given a better account of themselves there. A fact that people like to overlook is that JMM is actually the oldest of the three and is only still around because he has much better craft than either of the others did. Physically he is just as shopworn as the other two men, no idea why this gets downplayed really.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny
Marquez hgasnt been in the wars Morales and Barrera had so thats why he is still around. Erik and Barrera had really good fights and remeber Barrera started in 1989. Marquez has only been inlvoved in exciting fights in the last few years because whilst Barrera was in thrillers with Mckinney in 96 and Morales in 2000, Marquez was being outpointed by Freddie Norwood and Chris John. Thats why he is still about but had he started in 1989 and been involved in wars spanning 4 decades and 9 weight classes like Barrera I think he would be showing his age.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingI'd have no idea about Marquez' amatuer career; but even so I'd still mantain that his longevity as opposed to the other two can only be due to his craft. Barrera and Morales never beat top opponents once their reflexes started going, theres no real way to compare the men in this manner without giving JMM an edge. And while Marquez indeed isn't suited to face pure boxers, you can hardly claim Barrera has fared any better against come forward guys, having lost twice in his prime to Junior Jones and being obliterated by Pacquiao. Those were arguably the two best punchers he ever faced. I don't see how Naz is really a good benchmark either, especially given the form he was in facing Barrera. He was about as handy an outside fighter as Brandon Rios on that night, can't imagine Marquez or Morales wouldn't have done a similar number on that fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnnyBoth Barrera and Morales had way longer amateur careers. Longevity is not mainly about age. Think a little harder, what other outside style fighters has Marquez done well against? While JMM is certain a master against the come forward fighters with all guts, Barrera and Morales proved they can technically handle the style. Barrera took Naz apart which is one of the reasons he ranked so high on the all time P4P lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingYou may have a point about Barrera and Morales being more versatile than Marquez, although it doesn't hold a lot of water when used to contrast the three imo. The only opponent whose style Marquez was truly unable to handle was Mayweathers at welterweight; I see no way Morales or Barrera would've really given a better account of themselves there. A fact that people like to overlook is that JMM is actually the oldest of the three and is only still around because he has much better craft than either of the others did. Physically he is just as shopworn as the other two men, no idea why this gets downplayed really.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny
Marquez doesn't show his age as much because he doesn't take as much damage as Barrera and Morales, he more times than not sticks to his game plan and picks his opponents apart, doing more countering rather than trading, you bring up John and Norwood but both are good fighters, it's not like he's lost to unknowns, John is still undefeated regardless of fighting home more than not, neither Morales or Barrera would really solely rely on their boxing ability to beat an elite fighter, that's why in terms of technical skill I'd put Marquez above both, doesn't mean he's any better than the other 2, I personally think each had their own advantage or area where they peak or shined in and Marquez' was technical skills and strategyQuote:
Originally Posted by GAMEMarquez hgasnt been in the wars Morales and Barrera had so thats why he is still around. Erik and Barrera had really good fights and remeber Barrera started in 1989. Marquez has only been inlvoved in exciting fights in the last few years because whilst Barrera was in thrillers with Mckinney in 96 and Morales in 2000, Marquez was being outpointed by Freddie Norwood and Chris John. Thats why he is still about but had he started in 1989 and been involved in wars spanning 4 decades and 9 weight classes like Barrera I think he would be showing his age.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingI'd have no idea about Marquez' amatuer career; but even so I'd still mantain that his longevity as opposed to the other two can only be due to his craft. Barrera and Morales never beat top opponents once their reflexes started going, theres no real way to compare the men in this manner without giving JMM an edge. And while Marquez indeed isn't suited to face pure boxers, you can hardly claim Barrera has fared any better against come forward guys, having lost twice in his prime to Junior Jones and being obliterated by Pacquiao. Those were arguably the two best punchers he ever faced. I don't see how Naz is really a good benchmark either, especially given the form he was in facing Barrera. He was about as handy an outside fighter as Brandon Rios on that night, can't imagine Marquez or Morales wouldn't have done a similar number on that fighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnnyBoth Barrera and Morales had way longer amateur careers. Longevity is not mainly about age. Think a little harder, what other outside style fighters has Marquez done well against? While JMM is certain a master against the come forward fighters with all guts, Barrera and Morales proved they can technically handle the style. Barrera took Naz apart which is one of the reasons he ranked so high on the all time P4P lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by p4pkingYou may have a point about Barrera and Morales being more versatile than Marquez, although it doesn't hold a lot of water when used to contrast the three imo. The only opponent whose style Marquez was truly unable to handle was Mayweathers at welterweight; I see no way Morales or Barrera would've really given a better account of themselves there. A fact that people like to overlook is that JMM is actually the oldest of the three and is only still around because he has much better craft than either of the others did. Physically he is just as shopworn as the other two men, no idea why this gets downplayed really.Quote:
Originally Posted by fan johnny