Comments Thread For: Daily Bread Mailbag: Barrera-Hamed, Kell Brook, Canelo, More

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards tackling topics such as Marco Antonio Barrera vs. Naseem Hamed, Gerald McClellan, Guillermo Rigondeaux, the career of Steve Collins, Kell Brook and more.
[Click Here To Read More]

[Jab jab boom]

Funny how people try to consistently imply that Hamed didn't take Barrera seriously. How? When Barrera was by far the best opponent of his career. We're supposed to believe that Hamed trained seriously for Augie Sanchez but took Barrera lightly? Fk outta here. And it doesn't matter if he picked the other Mexican in morales, because morales would've whooped his ass too.

[Bunch Pag]

Funny how people try to consistently imply that Hamed didn't take Barrera seriously. How? When Barrera was by far the best opponent of his career. We're supposed to believe that Hamed trained seriously for Augie Sanchez but took Barrera lightly? Fk outta here. And it doesn't matter if he picked the other Mexican in morales, because morales would've whooped his ass too.

Only Hamed knows how lightly he took Berrera during training.. however, lightly or not Berrera showed him and everyone else that you can't take ANY opponent lightly regardless because you WILL come unstuck..

[sunny31]

Funny how people try to consistently imply that Hamed didn't take Barrera seriously. How? When Barrera was by far the best opponent of his career. We're supposed to believe that Hamed trained seriously for Augie Sanchez but took Barrera lightly? Fk outta here. And it doesn't matter if he picked the other Mexican in morales, because morales would've whooped his ass too.

I'm going to put your comments down to ignorance, it seems you weren't necessarily following boxing back then. Breads comments are absolutely on point here...Hamed didnt fall off a cliff, he was on a steady decline, but sometimes his punch power glossed over that decline. It's not as much as he wasnt taking Barrera seriously, but he wasnt taking anyone seriously, he started relying more and more on power bailing him out.

His Augie Sanchez performance was awful...Barrera was on the ascendancy.

Hamed was the cause of his own downfall, he controlled his camps and dictated the camps...never a good look for any fighter. It was the main cause for his break up with Brendan Ingle, his ego was out of control, and in the end he got what he deserved.

[Mindgames]

Funny how people try to consistently imply that Hamed didn't take Barrera seriously. How? When Barrera was by far the best opponent of his career. We're supposed to believe that Hamed trained seriously for Augie Sanchez but took Barrera lightly? Fk outta here. And it doesn't matter if he picked the other Mexican in morales, because morales would've whooped his ass too.

I think it's in reference to the documentary before the fight, where he was more interested in hes haircut then training. Hamed was always unorthodox, apparently started shunning roadwork after beating Belcastro, but like Tyson with Rooney, Hamed didn't look the same after he left Ingle.He got far too power happy, stopped boxing. Whether he would've beaten Barrera though, who knows?

[Jab jab boom]

I'm going to put your comments down to ignorance, it seems you weren't necessarily following boxing back then. Breads comments are absolutely on point here...Hamed didnt fall off a cliff, he was on a steady decline, but sometimes his punch power glossed over that decline. It's not as much as he wasnt taking Barrera seriously, but he wasnt taking anyone seriously, he started relying more and more on power bailing him out.

His Augie Sanchez performance was awful...Barrera was on the ascendancy.

Hamed was the cause of his own downfall, he controlled his camps and dictated the camps...never a good look for any fighter. It was the main cause for his break up with Brendan Ingle, his ego was out of control, and in the end he got what he deserved.

I'm going to put your reply down to typical UK fan delusion when it comes to boxing. So let me get this straight, Hamed was on a steady decline while Barrera was ascending... This despite the fact that they were both the exact same age, Barrera had about 20 more professional fights than Hamed, had already taken losses while Hamed was undefeated, and Barrera had multiple punishing fights against top fighters while Hamed feasted on lower level or past prime names? Yeah, OK.

The truth is Hamed was always more hype than substance. He had good power but any elite fighter would've shut down his goofball style.. and the second he truly stepped up, the difference in class was very apparent.

[Shadoww702]

The UK money is huge and someone may have bitten. Keith Thurman, Danny Garcia, Jesse Vargas.

Vargas was signed up and ready to fight Brook twice. Back in 2016 in the UK but Brook at the last minute cried over the payouts. Then they was supposed to fight in April of last year... I actually was looking forward to the fight. Vargas is a tough out. Losing only to Pac, TB, and Mikey. 36 rounds with those guys you have to be somewhat skilled.

[sunny31]

I'm going to put your reply down to typical UK fan delusion when it comes to boxing. So let me get this straight, Hamed was on a steady decline while Barrera was ascending... This despite the fact that they were both the exact same age, Barrera had about 20 more professional fights than Hamed, had already taken losses while Hamed was undefeated, and Barrera had multiple punishing fights against top fighters while Hamed feasted on lower level or past prime names? Yeah, OK.

The truth is Hamed was always more hype than substance. He had good power but any elite fighter would've shut down his goofball style.. and the second he truly stepped up, the difference in class was very apparent.

You show some ignorance again by talking in generalisations. The ages dont mean much without context, Barrera was absolutely on the ascendancy before Hamed, Barrera's only loss in 3 years was Morales, in what was a career best performance and a fight he actually won, he had learned how to put boxing and fighting together, as Bread mentioned in this article, his performance against Salud was SCARY good.

You can have your own opinion about Hameds level of competition, but the fact is he WON every major belt in the division and was the defecto number 1 for over 5 years. Medina came back to win the belt 3 more times after Hamed beat him, Ingle won a title after Hamed beat him. The problem with that era is that you went from good/solid world champions to 3 ATG's.

Hamed, like a lot of punchers peaked younger, Barrera refined his style and put it all together in his late 20s. If you have an eye for it, you can see the differences in Hamed at age 21-23 to after 25, less workrate, sharpness, you see a fighter who is cutting corners in training. Was Augie Sanchez a better fighter than Tom Johnson?Medina? It's the same as Mike Tyson, you can see less and less of the things that made them successful and more emphasis on landing the big shot.

The truth is...there are very few featherweights in history that would actually be able to handle his power. Barrera did and had the ability to put offense around it. Barrera isnt just an elite fighter, he is an ATG. Morales is an ATG. Marquez is an ATG. Hamed is a HOFer that's the difference. If you consider the 126lbers fighting today...there a few I would call "elite" but I'd def like Hamed over most of them.

I dont mean to demean you or anything, I followed the 90-00s featherweight scene pretty closely. A lot of my all time fav fights are in those eras. Barrera-McKinney, Hamed-Kelley, Kelley-Gainer, Morales-Barrera, Morales-Pac 1 to name a few.

To answer your last point...was Hamed overhyped? Yes...when he was active, because he was seen as far superior to the others, people always over hype punchers, it still happens now, all the time with fighters far inferior to Hamed. But in time he has become under appreciated by many, including yourself.

[Shadoww702]

You show some ignorance again by talking in generalisations. The ages dont mean much without context, Barrera was absolutely on the ascendancy before Hamed, Barrera's only loss in 3 years was Morales, in what was a career best performance and a fight he actually won, he had learned how to put boxing and fighting together, as Bread mentioned in this article, his performance against Salud was SCARY good.

You can have your own opinion about Hameds level of competition, but the fact is he WON every major belt in the division and was the defecto number 1 for over 5 years. Medina came back to win the belt 3 more times after Hamed beat him, Ingle won a title after Hamed beat him. The problem with that era is that you went from good/solid world champions to 3 ATG's.

Hamed, like a lot of punchers peaked younger, Barrera refined his style and put it all together in his late 20s. If you have an eye for it, you can see the differences in Hamed at age 21-23 to after 25, less workrate, sharpness, you see a fighter who is cutting corners in training. Was Augie Sanchez a better fighter than Tom Johnson?Medina? It's the same as Mike Tyson, you can see less and less of the things that made them successful and more emphasis on landing the big shot.

The truth is...there are very few featherweights in history that would actually be able to handle his power. Barrera did and had the ability to put offense around it. Barrera isnt just an elite fighter, he is an ATG. Morales is an ATG. Marquez is an ATG. Hamed is a HOFer that's the difference. If you consider the 126lbers fighting today...there a few I would call "elite" but I'd def like Hamed over most of them.

I dont mean to demean you or anything, I followed the 90-00s featherweight scene pretty closely. A lot of my all time fav fights are in those eras. Barrera-McKinney, Hamed-Kelley, Kelley-Gainer, Morales-Barrera, Morales-Pac 1 to name a few.

To answer your last point...was Hamed overhyped? Yes...when he was active, because he was seen as far superior to the others, people always over hype punchers, it still happens now, all the time with fighters far inferior to Hamed. But in time he has become under appreciated by many, including yourself.

Good points! Those were some ATG's!!!

I would favor Hamed to beat

Him to KO Stevenson
12 rounds decision win over Russell Jr.
I'm torn either decisions or KO's Leo?

I would probably give up my right or left nut to see PRIME Lomachenko vs. PRIME Hamed!!!

Fun Fact: Kid Vegas beat Mayweather back in the day

[Phill lynott]

Barrera exposed a pampered fighter who never had a set to begin with. Today I see the same lazy, gutless fighters who will pretend to emulate the princess. They even refer to him as something speacial to hide there own lack of courage. Josh Kelly is a great example of that. To this day Barrera exposing the fool Hammed was one of the most justice ever implied to the sport of boxing. That I've seen anyway. Thanks Barrera for winning that fight soo convincinly that they couldn't even rob you of the victory. I'll never forget how rewarding that fight was for me. Not to mention Barrera was a 3-1 dog going in! Took full advantage of that. Easiest money I ever made if not for Kostya Tszyu embarrassing Zab Juda