Marquez vs The 2 Mexican Greats

Erik Morales and Marco Antonio Barrera

Seems quite strange to me that they were both operating at the same time as JMM and at similar weights yet a fight never materialised between the JMM and either of the two. Also as they're all Mexican seems that a fight with either of them would've made so much sense but for whatever reason never happened.

However how do you think JMM fair against the two in your opinions?

Marquez did in fact fight - and beat - Barrera, mate. Back in 2007, I believe. Marco was a little past his best by that stage and Marquez won a deserved but not altogether convincing decision, which resulted in many observers doubting if the could have competed with a peak version of the same man. They are the same age, of course, but Barrera had been contesting world titles since 1994 and had been in some absolute wars which had blunted his edge somewhat.

It's difficult to tell how he'd have fared against both men at their peaks as the three of them matured very differently. Barrera's peak years were probably around the 2000 to 2004 mark, whereas Morales, despite being the youngest of the three, probably hit his zenith even earlier, probably somewhere around the turn of the century. Barrera and Morales were arguably at their very best at Super-Bantamweight whereas Marquez could, conceivably, be considered at his best at any of Featherweight, Super-Featherweight or Lightweight.

I do believe, however, that Marquez has now surpassed the pair of them in career record and accomplishments, and deserves to rank amongst the ten greatest Mexican fighters ever.

JMM definately edges it in longertivity and I agree that on accomplishments he has probably jumped ahead of the other 2 now although I wouldn't pick hi to beat either at there peak

Marquez never quite made an impact o the sport untill he met pacquiao as he wasn't really a 'Mexican' fighter like Morales as Barrera were. While his skills are brilliant and has been an a lot of entertaining fight but before pacquiao he didn't engage like the other 2 would

When he did fight Barrera, MAB was on the slide from the man in the morales fights and he still had his moments vs Marquez. Marquez was just doing a little better in the exchanges and made it easy for the judges to give him rounds

Morales was the man of the moment but taking the amount of punishment he did in such an early age hurt his body and he never hit the peak I thought e could have achieved

Marquez definately deserves his dues and is a real Mexican legend amongst the very best

I always find the Marquez v Barrera fight slightly frustrating in some ways. It was an extremely close fight, had it gone to Marquez by three points or less then ok, fair enough he got the nod in a close one, however two of the judges had it 111-116 and one of them had it 109-118. Those cards always stunk to me. I've heard many times that Pacquiao caught Barrera on the slide, and there first fight was in 2003 by which time Barrera had been a pro for 14 years. Marquez fought him in 2007, so Barrera was certainly past it by then, although he was also much better prepared than he was for Pacquiao I.

After the Marquez fight Barrera's record (2007-2011) is 4-2. The only notable names being Pacquiao and a young Khan, both of whom beat him comfortably. The fact that this Barrera ran Marquez so close makes me think he wins a close but convincing decision in a prime for prime setup, although given the way Marquez has risen through the weights that's difficult to imagine. Barrera's two best performances to me are Morales I and Hamed, which were at super bantam and featherweight respectively. Both of he which he should've won in my opinion. Saturday makes me think Marquez may well have been best as a welter all along!

The thing that Barrera does to convince me he'd win is what happened between '96 and '01. I can't think of any fighter improving so much in 5 years. The Barrera that got taken out by Junior Jones and the Barrera that burst The Prince's bubble are different fighters. He could always steam roll forward and slug away, but he learned how to box and counter excellently too. Marquez CAN fight, he can go to war. He has the chin, heart, strength, conditioning but he was always more comfortable boxing on the back foot. Barrera at his best was perfectly at home doing either and was no where near as predictable as Pacquiao can be at times.

By the way, can anybody remember which round it was when Marquez caught Barrera and was battering him all over, then right near the end of the round Marco ducks under a Marquez shot and clouts him. Marquez hits the deck then before he gets back up (the ref had already called it a slip!?) Barrera walks over and smacks him again! One of the more spiteful rounds I've ever seen, showing the good and bad sides of both of them.

Against El Terrible, Marquez doesn't have the slight range advantages he has over Pacquiao and Barrera. Again, it's difficult to sort out the weights as Morales was arguable at his best at super bantam with Marquez at his best from super feather up. Morales best performance in my eyes may well be Barrera I, despite my unshakable belief he didn't win, it takes two awesome fighters to make such an awesome fight.

There was talk a year or so ago about Morales v Marquez, given the way they've each gone lately I'm glad it didn't happen. I can see this as a fight of two halves, the first being Marquez looking to counter and Morales trying to stalk him, the second descending towards warfare territories.

Morales had a well timed jab when he wanted, as he showed in beating Pacquiao which would be difficult for Marquez timing, great though it is to negotiate impressively. Even when Marquez is being effective, his style being reliant on backing up and waiting for his opponent to work is not always what the judges want to see, which would call for a more aggressive second half. Going to war with Morales is like trying to outjab a Klistchko; you better be seriously confident and have exhausted other options before trying it, Marquez might not have a choice but to slug it out in bursts.

Despite Marquez, in my opinion, having superior power Morales workrate, chin and spiteful aggression would win out and I'd tip him for the UD.

My opinions on their overall standing against each other is another matter....

Cracking post that, JBW.

A little while ago I wrote a thread saying why I thought Barrera should be ranked highest in an all time sense, out of the three Mexicans in question.

Nobody found the claim at all preposterous, however things have changed. I did rank them
1. MAB
2. El Terrible
3. Marquez

Marquez being third was based on not facing the other greats in their primes when it mattered, and often picking up his best wins over guys appearing to be past their sell by date - Barrera, Diaz, Casamayour. However since then he's leap frogged the other two, not that there was ever much to seperate them in the first place.

88Chris05 wrote:Cracking post that, JBW.