Pac v Morales or Barrera - in their primes

[Gandalf]

Another old thread and I even posted on it. What's going on?

I have revised my opinion. Barrera and Morales could knock out all nughuggers in one round.

[zhubin]

It's a tricky question. Morales won the first Pac fight and he was just probabaly getting past his peak around that time. The second and third fights, Eric was clearly shot...and Pac was hungry. The first Barrera fight is hard to judge for me. Marco definitely had outside distraction...PLUS...i don't think him or anyone else was ready for Pac to explode onto the scene like that. Their second fight...well...Barrera was nowhere near his prime and was gunshy. I would say Marco would have the better chance in his prime because Marco was a cerebral fighter on top of being a brawler. Eric was technically a great fighter...but his pride always got the best of him.

[Manuel "Chubby" Medina]

I think Morales beats both, simply becuz he beat Pac when he was exiting his "Prime" and them beat Barrera 2/3...Morales was robbed of the 3rd fight...in their trilogy.

[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]

Another old thread and I even posted on it. What's going on?

I have revised my opinion. Barrera and Morales could knock out all nughuggers in one round.

Can you tell me the purpose of the 5 related threads at bottom of each current thread?

I havent read some of them so i went in and read. is it forbidden to reply to it?

[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]

[Gandalf]

Another old thread and I even posted on it. What's going on?

I have revised my opinion. Barrera and Morales could knock out all nughuggers in one round.

Can you tell me the purpose of the 5 related threads at bottom of each current thread?

I havent read some of them so i went in and read. is it forbidden to reply to it?

Oh come on now.

I wasn't being serious. I haven't been serious on a number of my recent posts. Just surprised to read through a thread and saw I posted a long time ago that's all....

[miron_lang]

Another old thread and I even posted on it. What's going on?

I have revised my opinion. Barrera and Morales could knock out all nughuggers in one round.

Can you tell me the purpose of the 5 related threads at bottom of each current thread?

I havent read some of them so i went in and read. is it forbidden to reply to it?

Oh come on now.

I wasn't being serious. I haven't been serious on a number of my recent posts. Just surprised to read through a thread and saw I posted a long time ago that's all....

sure mate

i wasnt being serious either

Just making up for lost time. havent been here for years. i guess saddo should take out that feature wherein 5 related threads are displayed no matter how old.

[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.

[Gandalf]

Can you tell me the purpose of the 5 related threads at bottom of each current thread?

I havent read some of them so i went in and read. is it forbidden to reply to it?

Oh come on now.

I wasn't being serious. I haven't been serious on a number of my recent posts. Just surprised to read through a thread and saw I posted a long time ago that's all....

sure mate

i wasnt being serious either

Just making up for lost time. havent been here for years. i guess saddo should take out that feature wherein 5 related threads are displayed no matter how old.

No, it's a good feature. It should be used periodically to confuse people like me!

[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.