what was your naseem hamed vs barrera prediction?

I thought Naz would knock him out in less than five rounds. Barrera was moving up and had a come-forward style at the time. Of course he played cautious and Naz didn't train, so Barrera ended up winning a close decision in a close chess match.

 

Remember it like it was yesterday, thought it was gonna be a bit like the Augie sanchez fight, thought hamed would get floored and hurt a few times but stop marco in 5 or 6 exciting rounds, shocked when he lost.

 

Yeah agree with the guy a few posts above...everybody thought barrera was going to come in for a tear up especially after watching the morales fight. Would have been interesting if he had. Reckon nas had the power to get him out of there...but again marco's power wasnt too bad either.

 

It wasn't that close pal.

And the Naz "not training" theory sounds like a complete cop out considering Emmanuel Steward was his trainer for the fight.

Naz got beat by the better fighter.

 

It's common knowledge that Hamed isn't technically skilled. Hamed used his natural talent which was his athletic ability and freakish power over technique and skills. Hamed had no technique or skill to his defence - he used his incredible reflexes. Hamed could avoid shots from different angles and throw shots from different angles, but his skill and technique wasn't good. Hamed had bad footwork and leaned too much were he used to fall about all over the place when missing shots and when he stepped up and fought the technical skilled fighters who could counter him his technique and skill level was found out to be poor. Hamed had zero fundamentals.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm stating concrete FACTS, so please don't come back and say Hamed was a super, technical, skilled fighter because he wasn't.

 

I score it a draw. Barrera's chin was ridiculous that night.

On silent/mute, I have Hamed winning by a few rounds after six or seven rounds and he had an excellent 10th round, and Barrera had a point taken.

Barrera did very, very little in the first half of the fight but cover up and wait and miss jabs.

 

Anybody that agrees with that is mental ryan. The mistake your making is your comparing hameds skill/footwork etc to that of a textbook fighter. They're trained in a particular way. To say it's not skilled does the ingles a massive dis-service. You think herol graham, junior witter, and naseem all just walked in with incredible reflexes and thats what got them as far as they did. There's no coincidence that all three of them as well as many more were hard to hit. To say that they're walking into the gym like that is mental. Naseem was very skilled to say he had zero fundamentals is clearly showing a man that fails to understand the ingle technique/methods. They're not training them in a normal fundemental way. You cannot compare naseem or any of them to that of a normal textbook fighter because they were never meant to be. Hamed was very skilled and his footwork was also very good

To say that when he stepped up and fought technical fighters who could counter his technique he was found out to be poor. He won every single fight he had apart from against barrerra. Who by all accounts is a living legend. His main problem was and it was the very same problem mike tyson had...when they moved trainers they're new trainers tried to teach them the fundamental way....wouldn't have mattered anyway barrerra still would have beat him...but to be fair to naz....not many would have beat barrerra. To call hamed poor skilled wise is telling half truths at best.

 

Seems you missed his final point-he has quoted Indisputable Facts!

Haha the point you made is very true but dont for one second think Ryan will budge, in his world/mind what he beleives is fact and undeniably true. Quite deluded...

 

Are you serious, a draw? Haven't watched it in a while, but have watched it at least 5 times. Wasn't even close in my opinion, Barrera out boxed him by miles.

 

Haha quality mufc! i should have knew better when i heard the line...You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm stating concrete FACTS, so please don't come back and say Hamed was a super, technical, skilled fighter because he wasn't.

I honestly dont know why i ve ploughed on after that tbh haha. Think i m just going to agree with whatever he comes back with. I think bulldog might have the facts as well so i m gonna stay away from that one too

 

Haha at least now you know-i spent ages trying to point out the difference to said poster on opinion and fact...what a waste of time that was as evidenced by the above!

Honestly id leave it too, you just get over run with blah and waving smilies....

 

A draw?

That's the first I've heard of anyone scoring it like that.

Barrera manhandled Naz in close, he out boxed him at range and it was Barrera who was the puncher in the fight. Barrera was the first legitimate tier 1 opponent who wasn't past prime that shamed fought and he got found out.

I had it 9-3 in rounds to Barrera if I can remember right. I only wish Morales had fought Hamed, a Morales would have put him to sleep:yep

 

Hamed was an athletic freak and he had a unique style that was brought to effect by his natural athletic ability. And Hamed did have bad foot work/placement which off set his balance and made him easily exposed to counters. It wasn't fundamentally correct to box the way he did and that means he would struggle badly with the top fighters. His style was found very vulnerable when he stepped up to fight elite technicians. I mean Hamed looked terrible against Kevin Kelley way before Barrera easily beat him. Watch him fall about missing shots and get leathered.
Hamed's unorthodox style was not cut out for elite level because it's flawed and the skilled elite level technicians were always going to expose him. That's why he quit early.

 

I suppose when you bring up these irrefutable FACTS i really cant argue with them.

You were right all along

What was i thinking

:good

 

Hamed looked far more dominant and devastating against Molina than Morales did against him.