Tweet
Well Jose, you'll have your opinion (I respect that) and i'll keep mine. Opinions are like *******s, we always have one. Case closed on this one. Peace.
-
-
You hit it right on the mark, he fought guys that were rated highly or were champions but that was only on paper, those fighters were made for Hamed and obviously like you pointed he considered Barrera as one of 'em. Now the 4 fighters that he should've fought, I'm not saying he couldn't beat any of 'em but they would've given him several loses or major fits if he fought 'em, but w/ the exception of Norwood who I think Hamed may have had his way with easily, Espinosa who does have a weak chin but has overall good boxing skills, JMM might've made it even look easier in defeating Hamed compared to Barrera, who I felt was too cautious and would've liked him to have opened up more and Lastly I think Jones probably would've had the best chance on beating Hamed and may have had the best chance of defeating the " Frog" by k.o., I mean Jones's jab sorta reminds me of Hearns's jab and he had a terrific right hand straight down the pipe which Barrera had no answers for whatsoever and we all know what the " Frog" is most susceptible to and it was the punch that usually either knocked him down or backed him up in several of his fights and that was a straight punch and I'd have to say that "Poison" had the best straight punch at that time. Now I'm looking at this as if it was back in that era and at that time, I didn't know that Gainer had no fight in him, but I also think Gainer would've had a chance in beating Hamed, I mean just the length of Gainer's reach and height 5'9 vs. 5'3 and Gainer had decent speed and a good jab.Originally posted by muay_thaiThose Fabulous Feathers
by Darius Ortiz
March 15, 2003
Naseem Hamed's reign over the featherweight class is remembered more for the fighters he ducked, rather than those he fought. From 1997 until the Barrera fight, it can be argued that Hamed never defended his title against the toughest opponent; most didn't even consider Barrera a worthy challenger! Most boxing writers felt Naseem would walk through the Mexico City star's mauling offense and flatten him with the first straight left that landed. Very few could have imagined the 'new' Barrera would outbox and out-fox Naz for twelve rounds, replacing the left hook to the body with a pulsating jab and a slick uppercut. Had 'Prince' known which Barrera he'd be sharing the ring beforehand with, he would have mostly likely skipped that fight as well.
No one's saying Naseem's era of featherweights rivaled that of Salvador Sanchez' or Willie Pep's; all I'm saying is 'The Prince' fought Kevin Kelley, Wilfredo Vasquez, Paul Ingle and Vuyani Bungu, when he should really have been challenging Luisito Espinosa, Junior Jones (back in 1997, fresh off consecutive wins over Barrera), Freddie Norwood and Juan Manuel Marquez.Last edited by rsl; 11-22-2004, 12:14 AM.Comment
-
WTF?! at least he got some articles to prove his point. Unlike yourself who rely so much on your 'expert' opinionOriginally posted by jose
Comment
-
Originally posted by miron_langWTF?! at least he got some articles to prove his point. Unlike yourself who rely so much on your 'expert' opinion
what are these articles?
just other peoples opnions and some are so shamelessy biased there laugh out loud funny. My god just cause a fighter is Asain doesn't make him god.
FACT Espinosa had to beat Soto to get his shot at Hamed...and he LOST
FACT Jones had to beat McKinney to get his shot at Hamed...and he LOSTLast edited by Sir_Jose; 11-22-2004, 12:24 AM.Comment
-
i agree jose, espinosa was offered the fight but he lost,had he still fought espinosa instead of soto,you would have all said he ducked soto!Comment
-
Do your own homework you! Watch the Prince fight Kevin Kelly and you tell us what you think? You little wipper snappers piss me off!!Comment
-
lol FACT is that DLH lost against Tito but youll always contest that it aint all black and white> opinions are opinions> you impose yours way too much man> chill outOriginally posted by joseComment
-
I saw 2 fighters unable to keep themselves off the canvas. was I suppose to be impressed?Originally posted by papartainComment
-
come on mooks, that a daft comment we all like a good slugfest including yourself cos you aint a big fan for his silky skills now are you.Originally posted by m00ks
jeez lose the bias man. 
Comment
-
Naz was a great fighter with a style so unique you'll rarely see anything like it again. Conifence was a big part of his style combined with accuracy, speed and power. Any fighter who racks up as many wins as he did while fighting with his hands down and wanting his opponents to try and hit him deserves a medal in my opinion. The key to everything about his style was his legs, thats where he used to generate most of his punches as he used to jump into alot of his hits to get the most potential out of them. Like most fighters of boxing history he met his versa in Barrera and every fighter has a versa. It's a shame he let that defeat break him so bad because that wasn't the end of the road for him, it was far from it. In his comeback after the Barrera fight i was ashamed how the fans treated him. Just because he didn't produce a KO and wanted to build his confidence back up they all booed him and made him feel like a enemy. That annoyed me very much because Naz oozed off positive vibes and chants from the crowd as his style was based on confidence and those shameful idiots whoever they were that day should be ashamed of themselves. They weren't true boxing fans.
Peace....Comment
Comment