Pac v Morales or Barrera - in their primes

[JazMerkin]

Part of me thinks the styles make fights. I personally had Barrera winning all 3 fights with Morales, but I think he is the one truly elite fighter who fought Manny in his prime. Morales had a good enough chin in his prime I think to withstand Pac & beat him on points as he did in the first fight, however, at that time Pac wasn't as refined as he is now.

As surprised as I am saying this, I think Pacquiao is the greatest of the 3, followed by MAB & then Morales. But all were more than capable of beating each other, I just think Pacquiao is the one most likely to be the victor on the majority of occasions

[Gandalf]

One thing I do regret is that the Pac: Barrera rematch didn't happen sooner. I really believe it would have been a much more competitive fight than both of the Pac: Barrera fights we saw.

The first fight saw Barrera clearly not expecting Pac to be quite as relentless as he was and by the time of the second fight Barrera's reflexes had dulled somewhat and he was just too conservative to make a proper dent in Manny.

A fight at the midway point in these junctures would have been very interesting IMO.

[miron_lang]

Part of me thinks the styles make fights. I personally had Barrera winning all 3 fights with Morales, but I think he is the one truly elite fighter who fought Manny in his prime. Morales had a good enough chin in his prime I think to withstand Pac & beat him on points as he did in the first fight, however, at that time Pac wasn't as refined as he is now.

As surprised as I am saying this, I think Pacquiao is the greatest of the 3, followed by MAB & then Morales. But all were more than capable of beating each other, I just think Pacquiao is the one most likely to be the victor on the majority of occasions

That's what im driving at. People say Morales and Barrera were out of prime but the more obvious thing is Pacquiao wasnt prime either when he fought them.

[Julius Rain]

[miron_lang]

im not sure what do you mean by that emoticon. Im sure you have build up your reputation here since 2007 more power to you.

[brucelee]

This thread is tricky.

Let's define prime first. I thought barrera was in his prime when he first met pac. It was just after he schooled Naz. He was at that time considered king of the featherweight. Wasn't he at the peak during that time? I can still remember that time when people here have been saying that Pac was just a tune up fight. Nothing more but a TUNE UP. His fight with Pac was in between his trilogy with Morales. Conclusion: Barrera was not shot during that time. He was clearly beaten by pac in his PRIME. It took some time for their rematch to happen because BArrera was not yet ready. Couldn't imagine he aged so soon. He actually even won a belt after a couple of fights after that.

Pac vs Morales. First fight was very nice except for one thing. Blood was all over Pac's face. Morales didn't fight a composed Pac there. PAc was clearly having a problem with all the blood in his eyes. Question: Is Morales still at his peak during this time? As far as I can remember, people were not even thinking that he would become washed up for 5 more fights with the way he handled Pac. After less than a year, he had his rematch with Pac.
pac was the underdog. The 2nd match was very exciting with all the exchanges the two were having. Morales had no sign of being shot. He traded with Pac and was getting really nice shots against Pac. he however, underestimated pac's power. Got caught in the later rounds with a left straight from pac and he's down.
Conclusion: Morales was not shot during the Pac vs Morales II. As to being at his peak, he could be as Pac was even the underdog during the second fight.

Pac vs Morales 3. As far as I can remember, some people here were saying that pac just had a lucky punch in their 2nd match. Morales was too brave that he again tried to exchange with pac. Got demolished in the 3rd round. People here were saying, " Pac is a monster". After that, people would say that Morales was already shot. Might be true. It could be because of the punishment he got in the 2nd match. Morales went on to fight DAvid Diaz. In many pe0ple's eyes, he was robbed there. Not too shot, therefore.


During all those times, Pac was considered to be one-dimensional. Clearly, Pac was not yet at his prime.

Imagine what a prime Pac would do to both Morales and Barrera.

[BIG H]

This thread is tricky.

Let's define prime first. I thought barrera was in his prime when he first met pac. It was just after he schooled Naz.

It was about 2 and a half years later wasn't it?

[Fenster]

Pac looks better than ever now. He had yet to reach his prime when this topic was started.

If he can score wins against them when not in his own prime then you'd have to say pomp-for-pomp Pac would beat both.

[BIG H]

Pac looks better than ever now. He had yet to reach his prime when this topic was started.

If he can score wins against them when not in his own prime then you'd have to say pomp-for-pomp Pac would beat both.

It's still really hard for me to say. I think MAB and Morales are the 2 closest matched fighters in history, I just can't split them.

The Morales that beat Pac was probably past his best, but the Pac that first fought Morales had nowhere reach his best and was just a one dimensional, one gameplan fighter.

I really don't know no who would win prime for prime btween Pac and either of those two. When I look at Morales v Barrera I, I wonder if Pac could live with that, but when I look at Pac v Barerra I, I think Pac probably just had his number - I dunno

[ICB]

Amazingly enough and work this one out, i know MAB was closer to his prime against Manny Pacquiao in there 1st fight. But he did have distractions which obviously affected him.

Because in there rematch when MAB was past his prime, he was able to frustrate Manny Pacquiao at times and i thought the fight was reasonably close after 9 rounds. And he did much better in the rematch against a prime Manny Pacquiao than he did against the one dimensional version.

So work that one out folks and i thought MAB fought the right fight against Manny Pacquiao, he just didn't make him pay enough with counters. Now lets put a prime MAB in that fight and i think the fight becomes pretty close.

As for Erik Morales i think its hard to tell IMO, Erik Morales clearly beat Manny Pacquiao in there 1st fight, when Erik Morales was past his prime and Manny Pacquiao hadn't reached his peak.

By the time the rematches come along Manny Pacquiao was improving, but Erik Morales was completely shot. Maybe not completely shot in the 2nd fight, but he was coming off a bad loss to Zahir Raheem, and i would say he wasn't far off from being completely shot.

So its hard to tell Manny Pacquiao never fought Erik Morales in his prime, and when Erik Morales did beat Manny Pacquiao he wasn't in his prime either. The smart money would say Manny Pacquiao by decision, but i don't know i think both of these fights are closer than people think.

[miron_lang]

This thread is tricky.

Let's define prime first. I thought barrera was in his prime when he first met pac. It was just after he schooled Naz.

It was about 2 and a half years later wasn't it?

Maybe but he's coming of dominating performances off Kevin Kelley and Johny Tapia. He was ranked #3 pound for pound the best in the world. You cant get anymore prime than that.