Hey Brits: Who Ranks Higher In UK Boxing Lore? Hatton Or Nas

[chrisJS]

Where was Hamed at his best on the p4p list? Ricky at one point was 3rd or 4th.

That's not always accurate though and can depend on an era. For example the highest Salvador Sanchez got on the pound for pound list was #6 but a couple years later Donald Curry was #2 and Tyson was #1 as a couple of examples but Sanchez is greater than both combined.

Bernard Hopkins didn't appear on lists until 2001 when he was 36, was he really inferior to Vargas, Corrales, Hamed when they were ranked higher? Was Lewis who never ranked higher than 7 or 8 really not as good as Hatton?

[mlac]

Naz, for this reason only:

[soul_survivor]

I think he has a claim to being in the top 20. I think Featherweight is very deep though and I haven't done a definitive ranking.

He held the WBO (helped make that organization legit), IBF and WBC titles and vacated them all. He'd have held the WBA too but Vazquez had to vacate in order to fight him. Vazquez was shopworn then I don't think that's a great win but his wins of Bungu, Johnson, Kelley standout as top wins and then though he wasn't as aesthetically pleasing he still got clear wins over Medina, Soto, McCollough that add depth to his resume.

The two major strikes against him are that Barrera was by far his best opponent and he never fought anybody near Barrera's class (i.e someone who would be considered pound for pound) and he was beaten rather easily there and he didn't come back to at least try and regain some luster. I don't think he'd have beaten the Fab Four of that era but it would have really helped him to have come back and gotten some other top guys on his resume like Gainer, Tapia, Harrison, Ayala, Espadas etc;

Can't argue too much with this break down. I don't believe the MAB fight was that one sided and both guys were very inactive in that fight, well below the divisional limit for punches thrown.

I think if Naz had stayed motivated, his hands didnt break so often and he stayed active, I think he could have reigned a lot longer. I think the version of Naz from Robinson to Kelley would have had a great chance of beating MAB, possibly Morales but not Pac imo.

Alas, we'll never know.

[-MAKAVELLI-]

wow...the poll isnt even close

[chrisJS]

Can't argue too much with this break down. I don't believe the MAB fight was that one sided and both guys were very inactive in that fight, well below the divisional limit for punches thrown.

I think if Naz had stayed motivated, his hands didnt break so often and he stayed active, I think he could have reigned a lot longer. I think the version of Naz from Robinson to Kelley would have had a great chance of beating MAB, possibly Morales but not Pac imo.

Alas, we'll never know.

I struggled to find more than 3 rounds for Hamed. I think that version of Barrera would always win pretty easily. He was more disciplined than prior to the Jones losses and often had a habit of making fights lower output because his left jab was so strong and his combos vicious if you got inside. Hamed's shot would be if he sold out and got inside but that's Barrera's fight too.

Morales, I think is Hamed's best shot because Morales was the slowest of the group and easiest to hit but he was also longer and hard to hurt. Marquez is all wrong for Hamed because he's a lot shorter and he's not a defensive mover and had awkward footwork and balance. He's not get set enough and would be picked off constantly and wouldn't like the combinations. Pacquaio at 126 is probably in lines with Morales. The opponent more vulnerable but also perhaps more likely to take him out.

I think Hamed has a relatively safe time with any Featherweight post that Fab 4 with the obvious exception of Lomachenko. Frampton would give problems I guess but not enough to win.

But yeah all mythical so we'll never know.