Tweet
I'm not saying Pacquiao is a bad fighter, if him and Naseem had met in the same era it would probably have been up there with the best featherweight fights of all time.
-
No it's just British fans have more knowledge of Naseem's potential and saw what he is capable in his earlier fights. And Pacquiao winning by KO is ****** as hell. If you're gonna make an arguement at least say Pacman to dominate on points. Naseem's power is twice as hard as Pacquiao's, even Barerra said that. I know its kind of ironic seeing as he got knocked down by Pacquiao but he allowed himself to take more shots from Pacman as he didnt fear his power as much as Hamed's.
I'm not saying Pacquiao is a bad fighter, if him and Naseem had met in the same era it would probably have been up there with the best featherweight fights of all time. -
Naz is the Puncher, even against Pac! But for me its a Pac win here and by stoppage! He throws to many hard fast straight shots with consistansy, he would rush Naz keepin him off balance scoring sum ugly KD's, then gettin a real Good KO in the mid rounds! Thats just my take, Dont get me wrong Naz was a hell of a fighter! Its easy critasize him coz of the Barrera fight but Naz really was a damn good fighter on his day!Comment
-
Pacquiao was a more aggressive fighter and didn't stay at medium range with Barrera, that's why Pacquiao had the advantage. Having all the power in the world means nothin if you're landing 8 punches a round.
I dunno, maybe British people can see things in the films that Americans can't, we're not that smart over here
But from my professional standpoint, Hamed ko'ing bum of the month opposition and ducking Kennedy McKinney and Marquez shows a sincere lack of integrity as a world class fighter and it reveals an intrinsic weakness that would unfold in the ring against a guy who fights as mercilessly as does Pacquiao. Hamed will not be joining Pacquiao in the Hall of Fame.
Comment
-
Weird works for a while. Hamed, while fast and powerful, won as much as he did primarily because of his awkwardness and those odd punches. Now a real fighter on here can correct me if I'm wrong; but there are essentially just a basic few styles you learn to fight in and when you spar you familiarize yourself with the other styles such as counter-puncher, boxer-puncher, slugger, swarmer, etc., even though each boxer makes or modifies a certain basic style into his own. You have an idea what to expect with most "orthodox" styles.
Hamed did have phenomenal talent, yes. I'm not saying he didn't; but his success was more attributed to his "gimmick style" IMO. He was awkward, unorthodox, etc and when a fighter faced him, there was no real way to prepare yourself for the goofy stuff Hamed would do, so he always had you off guard. My point is it's easier for a fighter to train for a variation of a "known" style than to train and take on a completely off thw wall style used by an athlete of above average physical talents.
Where Hamed ran into trouble was with a formerly top-notch south-paw, Kelley, and a true professional boxer in Barrera. I submit that Freddie Roach has greatly improved Manny's style and while he's still very aggressive and does get carried away some time, he is a southpaw which would be difficult for Hamed as it is for any southpaw to face another because it so rarely happens; and Manny could hurt him if if he hit him, was in possession of a Jack Dempseyesque or Mike Tysonesque killer instinct. Manny would smother Hamed and get so close to him that he wouldn't see Hamed's awkwardnes; and this would also take away Hamed's punching room, which would cut into his punches effectiveness.
Hamed would lose because his strengths would be taken away from him by his brand new pair of Pacquia underwear. Manny's aggressivneness would carry him to the promised land.Last edited by K-DOGG; 01-25-2007, 01:29 PM.Comment
-
Hamed should be in the hall of fame not for what he achieved in the ring but for what he brought to the sport. Go anywhere in the UK they dont have any idea of boxing but they will always mention Prince Naseem.Comment
-
Doesnt matter who Naz was facing, he always had a potential of being able to knock them out very early and more often than not, he did.
Of course, its just as likely that he'd have been crushed in a long encounter where his threat was neutralized, but that didnt happen as often.
Regardless of the competition, at that weight, Naz could have knocked out anyone, which is why I voted for him. His chances of knocking out people took a huge blow when he turned into a lazy fool who didnt train and thought that his power alone would get him through contests against excellent boxers.Comment
-
most people just remeber the recent fighters right now.
Manny recent fight are KO against Morales who in fact i someone could make an argument didnt want to fight when he was against MAB the third time and the pre-fight interview which is claimed by the commetator durign the third fight.
anyway before Pac KOed him he was UD by Zahir Raheem and the third time he was already going down and everybody in here knew it even in the second pac fight where his father wasnt in his conrner and adviced him to retire.
Barrera fight Barrerra was abit ****y and underestimed Mannys power he was in front of Manny the whole time and as you know Barrera is a multi-dimisional fight and he could have boxed around and not stay toe-to-toe with Manny if he knew he had the power.
so each one you could have an argument.
and you forgot the advance of reach and how it is effective against manny in the first fight against Morales that means if they slug out it Probably Hamed punchs comes to Manny more than manny punchs coming to Hamed and including the akward slips style too.Comment
-
Here's the tally so far
Pacquiao: 38
Hamed: 21
I guess it's a show and tell sport, and the show is everything.Comment
Comment