Barrera fans stop acting like he battered Hamed when he outboxed him

stay on the topic.... marco did really beat hamed to retirement... that hamed last fight was just a close curtain piece So true....... Even Tito tried to come back but hamed didn't even try- not the hallmark of a true true great, Amazing talent but didn't beat one hall of famer in his entire career

Barerra Clealry outboxed Hamed, but what he did that night, was take his soul. Hamed went on to retire from Boxing because Barerra exposed him. Exposed is the most overused word on this forum Hamed was on the outs at that time anyway....well paid, hand problems, weight fluctuations. Taking his soul is a bit much lol. Also he fought one more time after that. I believe Manuel Calvo, scored a kd but was unimpressive. No combos, reflexes dulled. Everyone knew and saw Hamed was unconventional, fought with his chin in the air, and the older he became the less combinations he threw and he depended on his power. That was no secret, therefore he was not exposed. When he fought Kevin Kelly a lot of people picked Kelly because he had better punching technique and good power. They thought his fundamentals would be the difference. Barrera was the only fighter to put all the attributes needed to beat that version of Hamed. A good chin, technique, power, defense and skills. Hamed was picked apart but he did not get beatdown

Why are obsessed with my nationality? The post that you're responding to cannot in anyway, shape or form, be construed as being biased. I'm not obsessed. It just seems that mostly folks from the uk carry on as Hamed apologists and champions. So, it's a cred check.

stay on the topic.... marco did really beat hamed to retirement... that hamed last fight was just a close curtain piece

I'm serious: are you English? I get what you're saying but I'm interested to see if you're blinded by bias Why are obsessed with my nationality? The post that you're responding to cannot in anyway, shape or form, be construed as being biased.

Barerra Clealry outboxed Hamed, but what he did that night, was take his soul. Hamed went on to retire from Boxing because Barerra exposed him.

Hamed get's mightly underrated by boxing fans. He was very, very good. Barrera was just much better and put a lesson on him. Morales would probably do worse, so would Marquez and Pacquiao. Those four were very very special.

Naseem hamed is the last undisputed featherweight champion since I believe Sal Sanchez. Cleaned out 126 from 1995-2000 you probably wasn't watching boxing then smh:smashfrea Sanchez was never undisputed.

He didn't really take a beating per se, Barrera was very mindful of Naz's power so he didn't trade with him which was a great idea. That basically expose Naz because he had no other plan but to land one punch and KO Barrera.

I was a Naseem Hamed fan. He was one of the boxers who got me interested in the sport. I didn't know much about Marco Antonio Barrera at the time. It's fair to say that Naz got owned that night.

They're just about the most accurate reflection of the most prominent and best operators in each division of that specific period. These aren't my own, biased rankings that I've made up to suit my own agenda; they're the oldest and most established ratings system in boxing. http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine%27s_Annual_Ratings:_Featherweight--1990s I'm serious: are you English? I get what you're saying but I'm interested to see if you're blinded by bias

Bottom line, Barrera kicked Hamed's azz and humbled him. To Naseem's credit he took the loss like a man

http://youtu.be/laTeL0oKbp8

Yeah, because the rankings always reflect the stiffest competition... Come on, man. That doesn't mean sh## Are you English? They're just about the most accurate reflection of the most prominent and best operators in each division of that specific period. These aren't my own, biased rankings that I've made up to suit my own agenda; they're the oldest and most established ratings system in boxing. http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine%27s_Annual_Ratings:_Featherweight--1990s

sounds legit............. http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1265000/images/_1266600_hamed_300.jpg http://img.terra.com.mx/galeria_de_fotos/images/39/077926.jpg http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/39244000/jpg/_39244011_barrera300.jpg http://www.boxnews.com.ua/photos/552/Naseem-Hamed3.jpg in the first pic, is that his left ear or something else? WTF? on topic, this is one of my favorites fights of all time, love barrera for this.

Call it what you want. All I know is that was beautiful to watch. And this about sums it all up ^^^^^^

Im sure a young strong Marquez turned down a massive payday to avoid Hamed? People talking like Hamed was at his peak when he lost get off his toes guys the guy was a force to be reckoned with back in the 90s and itshowed when he turned up in form (Kevin Kelley) the man was destructive. Barrera beat him fair and square it was a UD but not where he beat the living daylights of him.

Whether you think he was impressive or not is irrelevant and a subjective matter. You stated that his record was padded and that he beat no one of note, which the actual rankings of that period will reveal isn't actually true. That is not a subjective matter. Yeah, because the rankings always reflect the stiffest competition... Come on, man. That doesn't mean sh## Are you English?

Sorry, "bruv"... But I just don't think Hamed was impressive, and his competition wasn't so fierce. And, I don't know what "knowledge spans beyond the last five years in future" means I'm noticing a trend on here: if someone doesn't agree with someone it's automatically some sort of pissing contest based on who has been watching the sport longer. Let's stop that. I'm no Johnny come lately. Again, I've been to many fights, I've fought, and my family has been doing it for generations. It's a matter of perspective. Again, I was never impressed either Hamed or his competition. He got schooled that night, and he ran from the sport after that. (Barring one fight). That's the way it went down. This wave of Hamed sympathizers are usually just delusional euro dudes. We never bought the hype here in the states. Whether you think he was impressive or not is irrelevant and a subjective matter. You stated that his record was padded and that he beat no one of note, which the actual rankings of that period will reveal isn't actually true. That is not a subjective matter.

Whatever you want to call winning 9 rounds while landing flush combinations and embarrassing him along the way, that's what it was.