Britains best feather/superfeather weight/past and present.?

There is an argument (which I subscribe to) that Naz's prime was actually his early twenties. His speed, timing and reflexes were at their peak when he beat Steve Robinson, by the time he started fighting in the US he had already started to decline as he'd already become a multi-millionaire, hitting the nightclubbing life, blowing up between fights etc.
Interesting point about size you made though, Harrison did what most boxers do and biled himself down to try and get maximum size advantage, whereas Hamed actually moved up to featherweight when he would probably have still been able to boil down to bantamweight.

 

I was a fan of both Hamed and Harrison. Hamed was a level above, there is no doubt about it.

 

hamed anyday

 

Sorry Dunky, I just can't follow that piece of logic at all. I'm not judging McCulloughs prime on Boxrec (whatever that means) but its pretty obvious that McCullough wasn't the fighter at 33 that he was at 27.

As I said, although I don't agree, a good case can be made for Harrision beating Hamed H2H I but I think using McCullough as the yardstick is a valid way to make your arguement. Also the style issue makes Fighter A,B,C comparisions dodgy at best, McCullough and Harrision both traded on strenght to win fights and Harrison was much stronger, Hamed didn't need to use his physical strength anywhere as much.

Who would you say is Harrsions best win? Don't play the "hugging" card, you're just a guilty, if not moreso, with Harrision.

True but not really relevant in our H2H discussion.

I hope I got all the quotes tagged right!!!:nut

 

I've changed my prediction based on that. There's no way Hatton wins with those skinny arse ankles or wrists. :-(

This type of information is vital.

 

It was posted up a while back to "prove" Hatton wouldn't be able to outmuscle Pac.

 

:rofl *******s are awesome...

 

scott would have stopped naz when both were in there prime.naz was supposed to have been offered the fight but declined.wise move

 

Prime Naz.....what a fighter!

 

naz

 

Naz' prime was some way before Harrison emerged for me Billy.. Naz peaked 1995. I think that was the year Harrison was stopped on a cut by Miguel Matthews. Either way Naz' depreciation had well and truly begun as he exchanged torrid rounds with Medina at the end of 1996. Some may say his performances decreased in impressiveness as his level of opposition increased. I don't buy that. His performancres increasingly lacked creativity and sparkle and that was a result of poor discipline IMO.

Harrison versus Naz would have been interesting, no doubt, but I feel a prime Naz (as in the one who showed up against Angeles, Perez and Ramirez... and maybe Robinson) would have been too much for Barrera and Morales let alone Scott who never really established himself as the top boy when he was champion.

How is the comeback looking? Have you got any hand in that Billy? I've heard that Micheal Brodie has been looking very good in training recently.

 

Jim Driscoll.

Current best I would lean towards Burns and Mitchell, each has their strengths.

 

Pick one.... :hey

I dare you..... :good

 

fair comment jeff,i just think scott was so mentally strong and would have hunted him down,i will pick one burns ha ha,send my regards to your gym

 

I agree I think he'd give Mitchell nightmares