|03-12-2010, 08:32 AM||#1|
Slicker than your average
Join Date: Feb 2007
Quoted: 1 Post(s)Rep Power: 60
Total Points: 5,747,109,496.41
Is'nt it too symplistic to say Hamed would of lost to Pac, Morales, JMM?
Is'nt it too simplistic to say Hamed would of lost to Pac, Morales, JMM, particularly when you can hit as hard as Hamed did and when JMM is a guy that does have a shaky chin imo, Morales gets hit far too much and is inclined to go to war, Pac himself was not exactly hard to find back in the day.
I know a lot of people still to this day dont like Hamed but surely he would of had more than a chance with any of these guys? not many people went 12 against this guy without getting KTFO, even fighters with decent chins could get knocked out against Hamed.
Last edited by Dynamite Kid; 03-12-2010 at 08:38 AM.
|03-12-2010, 08:35 AM||#2|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hudson, Fl
Quoted: 2149 Post(s)Rep Power: 162
Total Points: 6,302,293,640,352,052.00
Pac is a 50-50 fight at 126, one of them is getting knocked out within 5, it's just a matter of who lands the big punches first.
JMM would have to survive the first the beginning of the fight, which he seems to always start slow, but assuming he did he would dominate someone as sloppy and arrogant as Hamed. No guarantee he would, but I think he would.
Morales would definitely beat Hamed. He would be able to do everything Barrera did no problem.
|03-12-2010, 08:52 AM||#3|
Boards...don't hit back!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quoted: 17 Post(s)Rep Power: 13
Total Points: 3,950,476,242,669,306.00
I think hamed stood a good chance against all of em..I wud've loved to see hamed morales both prime n hungry
|03-12-2010, 09:02 AM||#4|
Join Date: Aug 2009
Quoted: 26 Post(s)Rep Power: 14
Total Points: 1,162,607,684,367,625.25
That being said, Hamed was hungry for them. He chased Barrera (who eventually fought), Morales, JMM and Tapia for 2 years with all of them not wanting to fight him.
|Share This With Friends|
|hamed, is'nt, jmm?, lost, morales, pac, symplistic|