Naseem hammed should have been great - Page 5

MadcapMaxie · 06-29-2012, 07:09 AM

Could have been one of the best at Feather but def. not the best nor even top 5. No way Jose. Like many have said there are quite a few of fighters like him, fire*******s that had alot of attention and made a loud noise then but fizzled out quickly while people reminisce how good he "could've been".

HeavyweightCP · 06-29-2012, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadcapMaxie

Could have been one of the best at Feather but def. not the best nor even top 5. No way Jose. Like many have said there are quite a few of fighters like him, fire*******s that had alot of attention and made a loud noise then but fizzled out quickly while people reminisce how good he "could've been".

At his best he could have fought with any of them.

HeavyweightCP · 06-29-2012, 04:03 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

johnmaff36 · 06-29-2012, 04:37 PM

ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought.

HeavyweightCP · 06-29-2012, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmaff36

ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought.

Shows you know nothing about boxing or hamed.

johnmaff36 · 06-29-2012, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeavyweightCP

Shows you know nothing about boxing or hamed.

Ok, he shoulda been better than Armstrong, Pep, Saldivar, Arguello and Sanchez. Is that better for you???

Go and watch these guys fight, grow some pubes, and then come back to me and make the same claim

I watched every single fight of Hameds when they happened unlike you. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place

PowerPuncher · 06-29-2012, 05:03 PM

Pep was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place

Arguello was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place

Tyson was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place

I could go on talking bollox like John, I don't believe any of that and I'm not saying I rate Hamed above those men but if you say that about Hamed you can stretch it to the above boxers too

johnmaff36 · 06-29-2012, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

Pep was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place

Arguello was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place

Tyson was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place

I could go on talking bollox like John, I don't believe any of that and I'm not saying I rate Hamed above those men but if you say that about Hamed you can stretch it to the above boxers too

How am i talking bollox? Because i dont rate Hamed? Sorry mate but i dont. I just threw those names out in my post cos the other guy was quick to dismiss my previous post cos it disagreed with what he was saying. Whats the point of making a thread if you dont accept some disagreeing?

I also believe these guys were streets ahead of hamed

HeavyweightCP · 06-29-2012, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmaff36

How am i talking bollox? Because i dont rate Hamed? Sorry mate but i dont. I just threw those names out in my post cos the other guy was quick to dismiss my previous post cos it disagreed with what he was saying. Whats the point of making a thread if you dont accept some disagreeing?

I also believe these guys were streets ahead of hamed

Hamed could have been with them at his peak he was one of the best but he destroyed himself read the articles and vids i posted.

Leonit · 06-30-2012, 03:21 AM

I'm sorry but FW division is one of the historically deepest divisions with many ATGs and Naz never had what it takes to be better than fighters like Sanchez and the Wisp

Popkins · 06-30-2012, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

He did have a sharp heavy jab with plenty of recoil, he also used a lazy jab he left out to be countered to slip and counter the opponents counter, it's called drawing a counter

Are you serious?

You think Hamed alternated between a sharp heavy jab, and a purposefully lazy jab to draw a counter?

Did he walk on water to get to the ring as well?

Guy's jab was poor. Even if you adore him, at least stick to his actual strengths and don't make shit up.

Bollox · 06-30-2012, 05:24 AM

A very polarising fighter. Love or hate with not much in between. His personality was mostly to do with it, similar to Anthony Mundine. The difference between is that Mundine apparently puts on the act for the cameras and when they're not around he's a down to earth decent guy. Hamed seemed to be a full on wanker all of the time

But Hamed basically unified the feathers did he not? That in itself must say something at least, about the guy as a fighter

kingfisher3 · 06-30-2012, 07:24 AM

i would also say he was one of the truest switch hitters that i have watched, a skill that few can learn.

TED 822 · 08-02-2012, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcvey

That's about the size of it.

I won some £ when Barrera beat him, and really enjoyed that fight ,I dislike Mr Hamed.

Dont dislike him but like you won some money on Barrera.Knew it was in the bag when he didnt jump the top rope after moaning about the gloves,he was up against a Mexican who wouldnt be intimidated who IS an all time great.I think he pulled out of a couple of fights with Marquez also,for whatever reason.Despite this,a great talent who gave a lot of British fans a lot of great fights

WhyYouLittle · 08-02-2012, 06:52 PM

No he shouldn't. He tried to turn the most shallow dimension of boxing (as entertainment) into it's only dimension. It's beautifully fitting that a fighter previously known as a brawler pulled a solid, professional, tactical performance to dominate the fight. If we were talking about someone like Jack Blackburn, for example, who had a spotty record cause he was forced to fight people two or three divisions above him to make a living, than I'd say yes. Just put it in perspective, man. If you could choose between the gifted moron who was too busy showboating and humiliating another athlete to hone his craft, and an poor clumsy SOB who couldn't box for shit but was ready to put his clumsy ass on the line and to work like a MF (like Fullmer or Marciano or whatever), who would you choose to be 'great'? So, no he shouldn't have. He could have. Just like Fullmer's clumsy ass (not that he was 'great', but you know what I mean).

06-29-2012, 07:09 AM	#61
MadcapMaxie Belt holder ESB Addict Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 2,761 vCash: 500	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great Could have been one of the best at Feather but def. not the best nor even top 5. No way Jose. Like many have said there are quite a few of fighters like him, fire*******s that had alot of attention and made a loud noise then but fizzled out quickly while people reminisce how good he "could've been".
Top

06-29-2012, 04:03 PM	#63
HeavyweightCP Contender ESB Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,135 vCash: 500	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Top

06-29-2012, 04:37 PM	#64
johnmaff36 Champion East Side Guru Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: ireland Posts: 6,848 vCash: 1000	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought.
Top

06-29-2012, 05:03 PM	#67
PowerPuncher ESB Junkie East Side VIP Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 30,729 vCash: 1000	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great Pep was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place Arguello was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place Tyson was ridiculously overated and lost to the first decent fighter he fought. If you dont like people disagreeing with you then your in the wrong place I could go on talking bollox like John, I don't believe any of that and I'm not saying I rate Hamed above those men but if you say that about Hamed you can stretch it to the above boxers too
Top

06-30-2012, 03:21 AM	#70
Leonit Champion East Side Guru Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Todorov UD Maywether Posts: 5,062 vCash: 75	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great I'm sorry but FW division is one of the historically deepest divisions with many ATGs and Naz never had what it takes to be better than fighters like Sanchez and the Wisp
Top

06-30-2012, 05:24 AM	#72
Bollox Contender ESB Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 1,109 vCash: 500	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great A very polarising fighter. Love or hate with not much in between. His personality was mostly to do with it, similar to Anthony Mundine. The difference between is that Mundine apparently puts on the act for the cameras and when they're not around he's a down to earth decent guy. Hamed seemed to be a full on wanker all of the time But Hamed basically unified the feathers did he not? That in itself must say something at least, about the guy as a fighter
Top

06-30-2012, 07:24 AM	#73
kingfisher3 Contender ESB Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: south london Posts: 742 vCash: 500	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great i would also say he was one of the truest switch hitters that i have watched, a skill that few can learn.
Top

08-02-2012, 06:52 PM	#75
WhyYouLittle Journeyman ESB Jr Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 222 vCash: 500	Re: Naseem hammed should have been great No he shouldn't. He tried to turn the most shallow dimension of boxing (as entertainment) into it's only dimension. It's beautifully fitting that a fighter previously known as a brawler pulled a solid, professional, tactical performance to dominate the fight. If we were talking about someone like Jack Blackburn, for example, who had a spotty record cause he was forced to fight people two or three divisions above him to make a living, than I'd say yes. Just put it in perspective, man. If you could choose between the gifted moron who was too busy showboating and humiliating another athlete to hone his craft, and an poor clumsy SOB who couldn't box for shit but was ready to put his clumsy ass on the line and to work like a MF (like Fullmer or Marciano or whatever), who would you choose to be 'great'? So, no he shouldn't have. He could have. Just like Fullmer's clumsy ass (not that he was 'great', but you know what I mean).
Top