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

[sunny31]

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

I think GRJ close decisions Hamed after getting off the floor, I was impressed by his chin and toughness against Loma.

I think Hamed KO's Santa Cruz after being behind on the cards.

I think that's an easy fight for Loma, too much size and ability, it would be like Rigo all over again.

Yeah thanks, Augie was a def a good amateur and a good puncher. Hamed basically ended his career. He actually stretchered a handful of fighters, I cant explain how extraordinary that is as a featherweight. He was a truly gifted puncher, Manny Steward said he was p4p one of the 2 or 3 hardest punchers he had on the mitts and punched like a solid 154lber

[Jab jab boom]

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.

I'm reading a lot of excuses and further proof of YOUR ignorance. Hamed was an undefeated fighter and 8 of his 10 wins leading into his fight with Barrera were ko wins, with the other 2 being ud wins. Barrera had already lost to junior Jones and faced nobody elite until morales, a fight that he was an underdog in because it was believed that he was on the decline... Not ascending. There's a reason why Hamed went into that fight as the favorite and it wasn't because he was perceived to be on the decline while Barrera was ascending. In fact, the opposite was believed to be true. So the only factor that determined the outcome of that fight was that Barrera was better than Hamed in every way. Not because Hamed was on the decline, or because he didn't take the biggest name on his resume seriously. He just wasn't as good as advertised.

Lastly, your excuse that he was on the decline as most punchers.... Power is the last thing to go. You would've been better off arguing that his reflexes slowed. But that's not very common for a 27 yr old featherweight.

[Shadoww702]

I think GRJ close decisions Hamed after getting off the floor, I was impressed by his chin and toughness against Loma.

I think Hamed KO's Santa Cruz after being behind on the cards.

I think that's an easy fight for Loma, too much size and ability, it would be like Rigo all over again.

Yeah thanks, Augie was a def a good amateur and a good puncher. Hamed basically ended his career. He actually stretchered a handful of fighters, I cant explain how extraordinary that is as a featherweight. He was a truly gifted puncher, Manny Steward said he was p4p one of the 2 or 3 hardest punchers he had on the mitts and punched like a solid 154lber

Can’t argue there

[Ant1979]

I remember the Barrera fight well. They didn't want the Hamed fight for a good 2 years. They waited him out to the point he struggled with the weight, his hands and his ego.

Hamed only has himself to blame. I'm making no excuses for him. But at that point he'd lost discipline and self control. Add that to his hand problems (that were shipping heavyweight punches) and poor nutrition making weight and he was there for an excellent fighter like Barrera to take advantage of.

Remember there was a very good reason when Barrera fought Hamed when he did.

[aboutfkntime]

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 agree, which is why there was no rematch

if Hamed knew that he under-performed because he took Barrera lightly, he probably would have demanded a rematch

[1Eriugenus]

Agree with Sunny31 & I'm afraid JJB continue to miss the point.

Yes, the last thing a fighter loses is his punch, but that isn't the point. At his best Naz combined cat-like reflexes, lightning speed, unorthodox movement & a big punch. Like Make Tyson or Edwin Rosario he fell in love with his own power & stopped training with real discipline. All he had left was his power.

Yes, Barrera was the same age & had had more hard fights but he was improving because he had really started training with real discipline. From being a pure slugger he learnt from the defeats to 'Poison' Jones to become box-fighter.

Naz was a big favourite because everyone in Britain thought MAB was the same man he had been before his losses to Jones & that he was going to storm forward into Naz's punches. I bet on MAB because I knew that wasn't how it would work.

[elfag]

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.

IDK about training but fight night was one of the only times he didnt flip over the ring and the commentators picked up on it, he knew he was in for a tough fight.

Biggest surprise or stand out thing to me is there wasnt really much handspeed difference. MAB and morales at 122-126 were fast.

[sunny31]

I'm reading a lot of excuses and further proof of YOUR ignorance. Hamed was an undefeated fighter and 8 of his 10 wins leading into his fight with Barrera were ko wins, with the other 2 being ud wins. Barrera had already lost to junior Jones and faced nobody elite until morales, a fight that he was an underdog in because it was believed that he was on the decline... Not ascending. There's a reason why Hamed went into that fight as the favorite and it wasn't because he was perceived to be on the decline while Barrera was ascending. In fact, the opposite was believed to be true. So the only factor that determined the outcome of that fight was that Barrera was better than Hamed in every way. Not because Hamed was on the decline, or because he didn't take the biggest name on his resume seriously. He just wasn't as good as advertised.

Lastly, your excuse that he was on the decline as most punchers.... Power is the last thing to go. You would've been better off arguing that his reflexes slowed. But that's not very common for a 27 yr old featherweight.

I wont touch the last part as it's already been answered by others.

It's very clear to me now that you dont have any context of the time, or you weren't watching boxing back then. If I had to guess by your responses you are just reading off boxrec. Hamed's performances were getting more sloppy as time went on, the Mcullough fight was a low because of the turmoil in camp, but Hamed still played with him when Morales had issues, but that was Naz last camp with Ingle.

The performances got worse, Ingle was patchy, Soto was really bad, he was lucky to get away without a DQ, Bungu was good but in my opinion Bungu froze up as soon as he felt the power. Sanchez was bad.

The Jones fights were a distant memory once the Hamed fight came along. Yes there were people writing Barrera off after the Jones fights, but he went back to the drawing board, recreated himself and came back better than ever. This isnt my opinion, it is a widely accepted opinion.

They are not excuses - there are reasons. The whole narrative that Hamed got wiped as soon as he stepped up is false. Everything has to be looked at with perspective...I can see why people ran with that narrative immediately after the fight, but now it doesnt hold water because of what Barrera went on to achieve. It doesnt wipe out all of Hameds career.

You can believe what you want, but I know what a 23 year old Hamed looked like and a 27 year old Hamed looked like...you cant erase footage. Would the best Hamed beat the best Barrera...no I dont think he would that is why one is an ATG and the other is not. But if you think that was the best Hamed...I dont know what to say to you.

I would take Emmanuel Stewards opinion over yours, you are basically arguing the opinion of one of the 2 or 3 greatest trainers of all time, who happened to be in the camp, who was known to be brutally honest about his fighters and to his fighters. He literally said "the kid simply did not want to fight" "he sparred maybe 12 rounds"...that says it all

[Fire4231]

Another remarkable mailbag Bread. You are single handedly making the crisis tolerable. With all these boxing writers *****g an indigestible spin on their content (Dan Rafael), you are one of the only ones still honoring the sports essence. The crisis is showing who knows the sport and who still hasn’t figured it out. Because when you take away there ability to spin or overhype a current fight or fighter, they have nothing at all to say.

Looking forward to learning something new from tomorrow’s mailbag. You and those who ask smart questions make me dig into the fight library to rewatch or watch a mentioned fight with a new lens.

Thanks for honoring the truth of what makes boxing great.

[Jab jab boom]

I wont touch the last part as it's already been answered by others.

It's very clear to me now that you dont have any context of the time, or you weren't watching boxing back then. If I had to guess by your responses you are just reading off boxrec. Hamed's performances were getting more sloppy as time went on, the Mcullough fight was a low because of the turmoil in camp, but Hamed still played with him when Morales had issues, but that was Naz last camp with Ingle.

The performances got worse, Ingle was patchy, Soto was really bad, he was lucky to get away without a DQ, Bungu was good but in my opinion Bungu froze up as soon as he felt the power. Sanchez was bad.

The Jones fights were a distant memory once the Hamed fight came along. Yes there were people writing Barrera off after the Jones fights, but he went back to the drawing board, recreated himself and came back better than ever. This isnt my opinion, it is a widely accepted opinion.

They are not excuses - there are reasons. The whole narrative that Hamed got wiped as soon as he stepped up is false. Everything has to be looked at with perspective...I can see why people ran with that narrative immediately after the fight, but now it doesnt hold water because of what Barrera went on to achieve. It doesnt wipe out all of Hameds career.

You can believe what you want, but I know what a 23 year old Hamed looked like and a 27 year old Hamed looked like...you cant erase footage. Would the best Hamed beat the best Barrera...no I dont think he would that is why one is an ATG and the other is not. But if you think that was the best Hamed...I dont know what to say to you.

I would take Emmanuel Stewards opinion over yours, you are basically arguing the opinion of one of the 2 or 3 greatest trainers of all time, who happened to be in the camp, who was known to be brutally honest about his fighters and to his fighters. He literally said "the kid simply did not want to fight" "he sparred maybe 12 rounds"...that says it all

Excuses, excuses, excuses. You can try to defend yourself by pretending that I don't know boxing but I'm clearly more knowledgeable than you are by far. I've watched several of his fights before he got embarrassed by Barrera. Which is why I had no clue why everyone was so enamored with him and why anyone thought he had a shot vs Barrera. Nevertheless being a favorite. Hamed was always sloppy. He just got away with it because of the level of competition he faced. The guy went life and death with a washed up Kevin Kelly. I don't care if Hamed was 23 or 27, if he sparred 12 rounds or 120 rounds, he wasn't ever going to beat Barrera or morales or Marquez. So back to my original point, he didn't lose to Barrera for lack of preparation or being on a decline, he lost because he was never as good as his UK fans wanted to believe he was.... And making outside factor excuses diminishes Barrera just being the better man.