I don't buy the excuses because that's all they are, excuses. How do we know that Barrera was at his best, it's pointless talking about what if. Again, the worrying thing for me is that Naz still hit him with some terrific punches and he ate them all up without getting hurt. Barrera just looked the bigger & stronger man. If Naz hit you with his best shots and you could take them, he was in trouble.
Very few featherweights in boxing history are the right combination of durable and skilled to reliably take Naz's power and get him in trouble.
Barrera was one, and it was basically the first elite fighter Naz faced, and a fighter who had also been knocked out.
Its funny isn't it ? He was dominating very good boxers and making them look bad then knocking them out. Unbeaten for NINE YEARS loses one fight ........ and he's overrated.
Forget hand injuries, struggling with the weight or not taking Barrera seriously in camp, Hamed was technically ruined by Saurez and Steward in the two years prior to the fight. And let’s get one thing straight. Due to a compete style change, he was not in his prime for Barrera. If anyone thinks otherwise, you know zero about Hamed’s career. Zero. Zilch. Hamed, at his best, under Brendan Ingle, was an unpredictable boxer/puncher who threw punches that created wild trajectories and relied on these traits during his entire professional career, and through the amateurs. He was programmed to fight in a particular way. While he might have had balance issues due unorthodox footwork and could leave his chin out in the air in the process, that was always going to happen for a hands-down type of fighter who lacked basic fundamentals. The poster boy example: Muhammad Ali. Obviously, a risky style comes with consequences, with the Kevin Kelley fight, in December 1997, a prime example. When Saurez and Steward came in as his trainers in 1999, the first thing they done was sort out his balance, which in turn made him more flat-footed and predictable. And on top of that, he began to walk in straight up and down. The unpredictable upper body and head movement, gone, due to a more orthodox balance. There was a reason why Barrera circled to his left and jabbed Hamed’s head off and simultaneously avoided his back hand in the process. It was target practice. And whenever Barrera varied his game by stepping forward and attacking Hamed in a straight line before getting back out again, he couldn't miss then, either. Wide open. Hamed predictable. Chin in the air with no unorthodoxness in his game to either get him out of trouble or be in a strong position to counter effectively. Why turn an unorthodox boxer/puncher who threw punches from all angles into a concrete-footed, predictable robot while still operating with a hands-down style? Madness. The natural fighting instincts that made him so great in his prime were taken away. Forget Barrera. Check out the Bungu, Sanchez and other fights for the evidence.
But again, he didn't look any better against Kevin Kelley when Ingle was still his trainer. The difference is, his power got him out of trouble, but it couldn't get him out of the problems Barrera gave him.
A GOAT-tier entertainer, the sport is absolutely dying for somebody like him now, a huge punching featherweight with an exciting style and a questionable chin. In the social media age, he'd be a household name. For me, he is overrated. He was carefully managed because of his incredible PPV appeal, and as soon as he stepped up to fight an actual legit HOF of his era who was anywhere near his prime, he was exposed, beaten by a legend who showed him why there are levels to the game. Instead of trying to reshape his career, his ego couldn't take it, so he retired without avenging the loss, or even attempting to. I'd have him on the same level as Tank. I certainly wouldn't rate him anywhere near Pep, Salvador Sanchez, Manny, JMM, Barrera, or Morales, too defensively poor, but exciting as hell.
In no way was that fight competitive. Watched it live. Watched many times since. Naz shades three rounds, tops. Not one round did he win convincingly. Meanwhile, Barrera wobbled him a bunch of times, outboxed him, and was mugging him down the home stretch. Coulda made one a 10-8 round the way he kept catching jabs, getting countered, then driven to the ropes. Wasn't Calzaghe-Lacy but it was a drumming. Gotta give Naz kudos for trying all the way, but, as many have since said, Barrera simply punished flaws that were always there. The hand/weight issues can't hide the deeper truth. Naz was an excellent fighter and super entertaining, but ATG? For me he's a perfect example of the 'doesn't quite cut it' club.
As I said in my initial post, a hands-down style always comes with a high element of risk. Always. Put it this way. The Hamed under Ingle does tenfold better against that Barrera. And my post explains why. The style change ruined him completely. I’m not saying he beats Barrera under Ingle. Just saying his chances increase dramatically. And for the record, on the night they fought, I picked Barrera to stop Hamed late.
You saw it differently to me and at the time i could not stand Naz due to his arrogance.Once that bias against him mellowed i watched him a lot more and came to recognise his tremendous ability
He would have avenged that defeat if he thought he could. Obviously he couldn't. Didn't even try. A good fighter, compelling novelty, powerful puncher and box office draw. Deserves credit for all that. But his credentials for ATG status took a serious hit with that one fight where he was NOT really competitive. And let's not compare him to Ali, who was never dominated until the failed comeback against Holmes.
I'm another who feels he's a bit underrated now. I loved watching him back in the 90s. And Naz was pretty spectacular in the mid - late 90s, easily beating some very credible fighters. IMO he started to believe his own hype, fell in love with his own power, hated to train, hired trainers who didn't push him or compliment his style ... and it all started to slowly come apart. It had become obvious, to me, by the very early 2000s he'd become a bit of an accident waiting to happen. The Barrera loss wasn't a huge surprise - and I don't think people should necessarily judge him on it. I think a few years earlier Naz would have beaten him. He was already on the slide at that point. But his brief prime was exciting and worthy of the hype.
In my opinion Naz was a counterpuncher and Kevin Kelly would have beaten him had he been able to control his emotions. When he made Naz come to him, he was successful. When he went forward he got hit. When Naz signed to fight Barrera, there was no way he was going to win. I knew that Barrera was going to box him, not fight him. Naz caught a lot of guys at the right times- for him- in their careers. That's not a knock; that is what your manager is supposed to do for you. I have heard that a lot of his arrogance and cockiness was show and that he was a pretty good guy. A good friend of mine told me a funny story about a limo ride with Naz, Oscar and a lot of beer.