Tweet
Naseem Hamed. Looked incredible against all his handpicked opposition. And credit where it's due, he beat some solid if unspectacular fighters. Cesar Soto, Augie Sanchez, Paul Ingle. Even when he lost to Barrera (a truly world class fighter) he ended the fight on his feet. However that fight showed his limitations. Regular, decent, unconventional fighter. Barrera put him in perspective.
-
-
Roy Jones Jr was and is a myth, the biggest myth of the lot.
Mike Tyson and Naseem Hamed certainly were NOT myths, they were the real deal, the opposite to myths. You'd have to be a ****** to suggest otherwise. When they were young kids winning titles they were sick, they genuinely looked unbeatable, but then they just stopped training and stopped throwing combinations - it's as simple as that! They got complacent, and they went off the rails. They had it physically when they were in their young prime, this is clear (unless your blind), but they became over-confident and their discipline disappeared.Comment
-
Is this some kind of joke? Tyson was four years past his best and Ruddock was nowhere near his best opponent.Originally posted by Martin (Top Knowledge)Comment
-
Can you not see the point I'm making. My post about Hamed was not done from a negative point of view. I didn't mention the fact that he was remarkeable to watch. As I said, he beat a lot of very decent contenders. I wasn't debating his talents. However, his style just would not work against a truly world class, conventional Barrera.
If he backed off his training and bought into his own hype as you suggest then there is only one person to blame for that.
He seemed invincible, in truth was vulnerable. That's how I saw the thread. Didn't mean to cause offense.Comment
-
Hamed of 94-95 would of anihilated Barrera.Originally posted by monkeyboyComment
-
Just like Tyson of 86-87 would of anihilated Holyfield and Lewis.Comment
-
And it's NOT myth, it's ****ing reality.Comment
-
Easy mate. We're just discussing. Happy to debate with you. You are obviously smart and know your stuff but I don't need to be sworn at and called names. I know there are twats on this site who want to fight and are haters. I'm not one of them. Cool down.
So back on to the subject. Tyson's downfall is fairly obvious to understand. There have been thousands of threads on it. So why did Hamed let his **** go? No doubts that Hamed was immensely talented but if his desire was slipping or his training or both, why didn't his management or trainers or even himself see that Barrera was a step up from the others?
Bearing in mind that you feel he could easily have beaten Barrera, why did he not train and when and against who was his last peak(ish) fight?Comment
-
His best ever performance remains Steve Robinson, his last decent performance is Tom Johnson.Originally posted by monkeyboy
Hamed stopped training as hard when he became a champion and a real star, he didn't have as many doubters and had the natural speed and natural power to be able to knock guys out and so he saw no need to train hard anymore because he had no points to prove. He gradually became more and more of a stranger to the gym, and gradually became more and more reliant on just the one big punch. So by the time he fought Barrera, he was at his worst and had no chance of winning that fight. He was extremely over-confident by then!Comment
-
Thanks. I'll look for those two fights. Any idea why he gave up the IBF belt?Comment
Comment