The Prince

[Chris46]

Lol i watched a video of him, as he was getting up he flipped himself up and did a wee handstand thing/ head over heels

[The Noose]

Everyone put Hamed down? I think you'll find MAB was the only person ever to put him down so wtf are you talking about? I seriously hope ive read that wrong or understood it wrong!

Which round did Barrera put him down in? He didnt.

Hamed was put down by Kelly, Sanchez, Alicea, and Johnson.

Anyway, my point was, no one can say Hamed didnt fight anyone, and Barrera did.
Hamed dominated the featherweight division for 6 years. Fighting and beating all the other champions.

[Chris46]

Yeh thought i'd understood it wrong lol

[Jim_Davis]

Lol i watched a video of him, as he was getting up he flipped himself up and did a wee handstand thing/ head over heels

Yeah that was that Detroit fight where Hamed wrestled the guy donw on the floor then flipped himself up. He made boxing so much more fun

[hugh grant]

Which round did Barrera put him down in? He didnt.

Hamed was put down by Kelly, Sanchez, Alicea, and Johnson.

Anyway, my point was, no one can say Hamed didnt fight anyone, and Barrera did.
Hamed dominated the featherweight division for 6 years. Fighting and beating all the other champions.

Befor Hamed lost to Barrera, it was indeed Hamed who was the boxing superstar alongside RJJ, although Hamed was never rated as highly. It is true that Barrera hadnt beaten anyone Hamed wouldnt have beat and that is why it was Hamed who was favourite to beat Barrera and it was a bit of an upset (although not as big an upset as Buster Douglas v Tyson) when Hamed did lose to Barrera.

Yeh thought i'd understood it wrong lol

I understood what he was getting at

[ianwigley]

[QUOTE=hugh grant;2192706]Befor Hamed lost to Barrera, it was indeed Hamed who was the boxing superstar alongside RJJ, although Hamed was never rated as highly. It is true that Barrera hadnt beaten anyone Hamed wouldnt have beat and that is why it was Hamed who was favourite to beat Barrera and it was a bit of an upset (although not as big an upset as Buster Douglas v Tyson) when Hamed did lose to Barrera.



I understood what he was getting at

It is true that Hamed wouldn't have beaten a bloke or two that Barrera got beat by, namely Erik Morales.

[Shanus]

He was a great fighter but he let it slip which dented his legacy tremendously.

[.Mik.]

Some of the posting in this thread has gone moronically downhill.

People have this bizarre retrospect imagination that claims people who WERE very credible opponents at the time, who took a good beating off Naseem then lose credibility when they are viewed from the future. When Naz fought many of the guys mentioned above, they were rated highly by boxing commentators, critics, analysts and by the federations. Naz beat them, they didnt get their careers back on track after that (largely the same as how many of the people Tyson beat who looked great and dangerous up to that fight, never got their careers back on track after taking a Tyson knock out), that doesnt belittle what they were at the time. Most of the time they were highly rated champions.

So two myths that really need to be dispelled in this thread are the following:

1). Naz didnt fight anyone decent. Yes he did, he fought a lot of very good champions who were considered a threat. As many as anyone else at the time. Dont besmirch their career by claiming that they were ****, do you know how hard it is to become a world champion at something?

2). The first time Naz faced a real fighter, he got his arse kicked. Incorrect, the first time Naz faced someone who got the tactics correct against him (he'd fought plenty of fighters capable of beating him previously), he got comfortably outfought and defeated (he didnt go down, it wasnt a particularly wide UD, he never looked especially troubled or hurt and at no stage was he 'out on his feet', so it wasnt an arse-kicking).

[Chris46]

I love you, everyones pwned lol

[The Noose]

Some of the posting in this thread has gone moronically downhill.

People have this bizarre retrospect imagination that claims people who WERE very credible opponents at the time, who took a good beating off Naseem then lose credibility when they are viewed from the future. When Naz fought many of the guys mentioned above, they were rated highly by boxing commentators, critics, analysts and by the federations. Naz beat them, they didnt get their careers back on track after that (largely the same as how many of the people Tyson beat who looked great and dangerous up to that fight, never got their careers back on track after taking a Tyson knock out), that doesnt belittle what they were at the time. Most of the time they were highly rated champions.

So two myths that really need to be dispelled in this thread are the following:

1). Naz didnt fight anyone decent. Yes he did, he fought a lot of very good champions who were considered a threat. As many as anyone else at the time. Dont besmirch their career by claiming that they were ****, do you know how hard it is to become a world champion at something?

2). The first time Naz faced a real fighter, he got his arse kicked. Incorrect, the first time Naz faced someone who got the tactics correct against him (he'd fought plenty of fighters capable of beating him previously), he got comfortably outfought and defeated (he didnt go down, it wasnt a particularly wide UD, he never looked especially troubled or hurt and at no stage was he 'out on his feet', so it wasnt an arse-kicking).

Thats pretty much it in a nutshell. But im sure someone will still talk ****.
The only thing i disagree with is that Hamed wasnt hurt against Barrera. He hurt and shaken in the first, and later on with a perfect right counter that made Hamed hold on.
But his recovery powers were always very good.