Barrera V Morales

Dug out the old Barrera v Morales trilogy DVD this weekend to enjoy with a few beers and pizza whilst I had some free time. The first fight is an enduring classic, still amuses me that Barrera was a 4/1 underdog going in. What doesn't amuse me is the way such a classic fight was tainted with a bad decision. No matter how many times I watch it I can't give anything other than a Barrera decision. The second was a more technical affair and I've scored it as a draw and a morales win, but never a Barrera win - yet he got the nod so I guess justice was done. The rubber match was a mixture of technical boxing and a bit of warfare, and for me the only fight of the 3 where the correct decision - a Barrera UD - was given. 

It's very hard to separate them, but I feel overall Barrera was the more rounded, versatile fighter with the better boxing brain. The Junior Jones bouts are a bit of a blot on his record but in winning titles in 3 weights and taking Morales and Hameds '0's I'd say he did enough to be ranked a top 50 ATG and ranked ahead of Morales. 

Would anyone be remotely interested in seeing a 4th instalment now they're both back fighting at 140lbs?

How do you judge these two Mexican legends - against each other and in the overall pantheon of boxing?

Ayup Sugar Boy, nice article.

First off, on the subject of their trilogy; I scored the first and the third fights decisively to Barrera (particularly the first one, tremendous fight but a stinker by the judges), with the second fight a draw. But allowing for differences of opinion, I think 2-1 to Barrera as an end result was fair. Given how incredibly similar their respective achievements are outside of this trilogy, this is the main reason why Barrera has to rank a fraction (and I do mean only a fraction) ahead of 'El Terrible.'

I'd agree with you that Barrera was the more complete all-round fighter of the pair. Morales was (and, I suppose, still is) a much better technician than people give him credit for, but he did lack a plan B sometimes. Barrera had a fair whack on him in his pomp but always had that option of counter-punching and working behind a jab, just as he did against Hamed. This is something which Morales lacked (or simply decided not to employ) and I think it played a part in their trilogy, with Barrera making the on-rushing Morales chase him and look a little clumsy now and then.

Of course, Morales has the wins over Junior Jones and Pacquiao, who Barrera was 0-4 against combined. But Barrera has the edge in longevity and consistency; the Pacquiao win aside, Morales never particularly impressed me above Featherweight, and had virtually nothing left in the tank at thirty. Would have to say that the way in which Barrera came back from adversity in his career is something which elevates him slightly above Morales; when Barrera found his career perhaps going away from him (he was considered 'done' after Morales won their first bout) he rebounded with a win over the 35-0 Hamed. Morales, on the other hand, went in to decline and stayed there, yet to return.

So in all, Barrera ahead by the smallest margin, for me. As to where to rank them, well in Mexican terms I'd only have Chavez, Sanchez, Saldivar, Lopez, Olivares and Zarate ahead of them; pretty good company. In overall terms it's tricky, but I'd say somewhere around the sixty to sixty five mark seems fair. Some will slaughter me for that, but as I say it's a tricky task.

Can't say I'd be all that interested in a fourth fight between them at this stage, but with the genuine antipathy between them I suppose it's a possibility.

Nice article.

Cheers chris, nice input.

Agree that given their achievements are so similar you have to look at things such as head to head, common opponents, longevity and percieved ability - categories of which I'd give Barrera 3 out of 4 (with morales having the advantage over common opponents). What I love most about Barrera is his ability to return from adversity. After Jones he retired, briefly, and everyone thought he was done, yet he came back to win more titles and get robbed against morales as a huge underdog. Then as an underdog against Naz he surprised everyone again. Add in the little cameos such as the needle with Erik and the "who's your daddy" moment with Naz and I have to make him my favourite Mexican fighter of recent times, ahead of morales and JMM of whom I'm also a huge fan.

I'm with you on not wanting to see a 4th fight, some dogs are best left sleeping and it would be a shame to taint a classic trilogy with a disappointing 4th fight in the Vasquez Marquez mold.

I had Morales winning the second by 9 rounds to 3. Biggest robbery of all 3 fights.