How would Floyd have dealt with a Prime Naseem Hamed/Junior Witter type?(stylisticly)

Like I said, he was only 21, 22 when those fights were occurring but he was already an unbelievable talent, if he'd have been able to keep improving under Ingle, who knows how good he could've been? Thats the sad part. So if he was getting nailed like that then, and was continually nailed against Kelly, Sanchez, Ingle, then when was his prime, and how is he considered illusive? Hamed was an unorthodox big puncher who if not for his power would of got found out long before he did. His power bailed him out numerous times......Ingle, Kelly, Sanchez, Alicea. His technical ability wasn't up to standard. Now that wasn't such an issue when he campaigned at domestic level, but when he moved up and started competing against different styles that started to get exploited more and more, and he had to rely more on the power. Hamed looked great against certain styles. Fighters who came at him creating his offense, because he was a counter puncher. When he had to go foward and be more aggressive he often left himself open and his lack of fundamentals started to show up. He couldn't of been anymore than he was because of his lack of fundamentals and dedication. That's WHY his career unfolded the way it did. Bernard Hopkins is not just great because of what he's done in the ring. He's great because of how he's lived his life outside the ring and the dedication he has to his sport. Hamed lacked that and that's why his career is a true reflection of the talent he had. If you think he gets underrated because he could of done so much more than you're wrong. Hamed is rated accordingly for the direction HE took his career.

So he was illusive in his prime except when he was getting nailed earlier on his career by Medina, Johnson, Alicea. That was just a case of.... if you step under a shower you gonna get wet. The fact he continued getting nailed can be put down to the fact he'd lost his desire of coarse, that he'd changed trainer. Just when was his prime in your opinion? Like I said, he was only 21, 22 when those fights were occurring but he was already an unbelievable talent, if he'd have been able to keep improving under Ingle, who knows how good he could've been? Thats the sad part.

Sergio ain't shi.t...that's why he's stalking WW's... Let him call out Ward at a catchweight or the winner of Bute/Froch... Its simple. Anyone who cals out floyd or if floyd hasn't fought them, then floyd needs to fight them because they would beat floyd. Same stupid **** every day.

No, in his prime he was elusive. He would avoid many punches and even the ones that landed were glancing. He went for KOs an big punches that left him open at times but his reflexes, footspeed and body movement were up there with the best. Too bad he got distracted by the bright lights. So he was illusive in his prime except when he was getting nailed earlier on his career by Medina, Johnson, Alicea. That was just a case of.... if you step under a shower you gonna get wet. The fact he continued getting nailed can be put down to the fact he'd lost his desire of coarse, that he'd changed trainer. Just when was his prime in your opinion?

With that said you still consider him illusive though. You expect people to concede that his dedication & footwork deteriorated but dont you think some of that was down to the quality of opposition? The problem with you Hamed fans is you wanna lay everything at the blame of him changing trainer, losing his passion for Boxing. No, in his prime he was elusive. He would avoid many punches and even the ones that landed were glancing. He went for KOs an big punches that left him open at times but his reflexes, footspeed and body movement were up there with the best. Too bad he got distracted by the bright lights.

If you get in the shower you are going to get wet. If you get in the ring you are going to get hit. Hamed put his chin out there to be hit, to open his opponents defence. Hamed concentrated too much on power, his footwork got poorer and his reflexes were not as sharp. All this was talked about at the time. With that said you still consider him illusive though. You expect people to concede that his dedication & footwork deteriorated but dont you think some of that was down to the quality of opposition? The problem with you Hamed fans is you wanna lay everything at the blame of him changing trainer, losing his passion for Boxing.

Anyone who keeps their hands low vs Floyd gets pot shotted to a pulp.. Naz's power was special though sergio would do it and win by ko

Exactly. Its no coincidence he started getting put down when he became champion and had to face a higher quality of opposition. Its true he neglected his boxing skills and just wanted the KO, but also that his style was figured out. He was always open for counter punches. His flaws were always there, but his opponents werent good enough to take advantage of them. Floyd wouldnt of had much trouble against a guy who carried his hands so low and took so many chances. Barrera beat him by countering. ...............Agreed.

His decline didn't happen when he was looking terrible against Medina though. When he was getting nailed by Tom Johnson and put down by Alicea. If you get in the shower you are going to get wet. If you get in the ring you are going to get hit. Hamed put his chin out there to be hit, to open his opponents defence. Hamed concentrated too much on power, his footwork got poorer and his reflexes were not as sharp. All this was talked about at the time.

He still got hit with flush punches against Tom Johnson. He was actually down against Alicea so dont know how you can dismiss that also. You should watch that fights I suggested back even if you've seen em. You will then get a real idea of what I'm talking about. He had major holes in his game defensively, pre and post Steward. Yeah but he was only 21, 22. I believe he made his US debut at 23. He was very young and had plenty to learn obviously but he was never gonna improved under Steward who didn't know how to hone his style.

His decline didn't happen when he was looking terrible against Medina though. When he was getting nailed by Tom Johnson and put down by Alicea. Exactly. Its no coincidence he started getting put down when he became champion and had to face a higher quality of opposition. Its true he neglected his boxing skills and just wanted the KO, but also that his style was figured out. He was always open for counter punches. His flaws were always there, but his opponents werent good enough to take advantage of them. Floyd wouldnt of had much trouble against a guy who carried his hands so low and took so many chances. Barrera beat him by countering.

His decline was certainly more swift after he left Ingle. Medina was the only fight out of those where he consistently got caught and he was fighting with a bad cold. He still got hit with flush punches against Tom Johnson. He was actually down against Alicea so dont know how you can dismiss that also. You should watch that fights I suggested back even if you've seen em. You will then get a real idea of what I'm talking about. He had major holes in his game defensively, pre and post Steward.

His decline didn't happen when he was looking terrible against Medina though. When he was getting nailed by Tom Johnson and put down by Alicea. His decline was certainly more swift after he left Ingle. Medina was the only fight out of those where he consistently got caught and he was fighting with a bad cold.

No his decline was clear and people were talking about it well before he lost to MAB. His decline didn't happen when he was looking terrible against Medina though. When he was getting nailed by Tom Johnson and put down by Alicea.

Hamed fans suffer from Mike Tyson fan syndrome. Make history up as you go along to excuse the fighters inadequacy's as a fighter. Bring everything back to when he looked at his best and claim it to be his prime irrespective of whether he looked better because of who he was fighting. Is it any coincidence that both were exciting big punchers though, and both didn't for-fill their perceived potential? No his decline was clear and people were talking about it well before he lost to MAB.

Having said all that^^^ God-forbid we might have to come to the conclusion those fighters just weren't as good as some people perceive them to be. This is why its easier for those fans to run with what they would rather believe.

Hamed fans suffer from Mike Tyson fan syndrome. Make history up as you go along to excuse the fighters inadequacy's as a fighter. Bring everything back to when he looked at his best and claim it to be his prime irrespective of whether he looked better because of who he was fighting. Is it any coincidence that both were exciting big punchers though, and both didn't for-fill their perceived potential?

It just means he has great recuperative powers. Punch still hurt him. Like I said, you must have a different definition. All punches "hurt" to an extent.

Whenever I got hurt as a fighter I was wobbled or staggered. Not really ready to be KTFO, but certainly jarred. I'm guessing your definition means ready to be taken out? I feel Hamed was hurt in this vid, go to 1:50 and his legs stiffen and his whole body is moved by the shot, I felt that must have hurt him. I knew what shot you were talking about before you put that up. He was caught in a bad position and knocked off balance. You can see he's completely fine straight after he gets his balance back. Naz had an amazing chin.

Didn't know you cared. of course i do. u entertain me with your silliness. its one thing to be biased. its another thing totally to be biased to the point where the **** u say makes no sense. kell brook is a threat to floyd? since when??? dude has not even proven anything to be considered a threat to victor ortiz.