Naseem Hamed

100% spot on, he had a dig like a kick off a mule...hand damage was always going to be an issue with his power...:yep

 

Yep, thats the one.

 

It doesnt matter Hamed was never beating Barrera, he was lucky to beat Kelly before that. Barrera absolutely schooled Hamed when they fought. I know he didn't train well etc, but even if he had prepared better Barrera would have beat him convincingly.

I think people getting a bit carried away with Hamed, he was flashy and I enjoyed watching his earlier fights but was over-hyped and ultimately got found out.

 

he bottomed out around 98.

he didn't progress after that.

he started becoming easier to hit and more flat footed.

i always thought barrera and morales would beat him fairly soundly.

sadly he didn't stick around long enough for morales. :-(

 

yh 42min.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/b0070lk9/console

 

atsch:nut

 

If you haven't seen it, you must watch Hamed Vs. Kelly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Hamed was a great fighter.He was poor against Barrera though.He had looked to be on the slide for a few fights.He just seemed to lose intrest,he was ready to retire long before he fought Marco.

 

Hamed was certainly the hardest hitting British fighter I've ever seen. He was consistantly devastating. His use of angles and timing also contibuted to his many knockouts but he was a bit of a freak punching power wise. Bit like Alexander and jackson he didn't even have to try to get the Ko it just came.

 

I agree with that. That is why Hamed great to watch.

 

No. He didn't. Dropping 4 rounds to Hamed doesn't equate to a "an absolute schooling". A schooling is Calzaghe/Lacy or Pavlik/Hopkins, where the opponent is lucky to win one minute of one round.

Hamed/Barrera was a clear and comfortable win for Barrera, nothing more than that. I don't know why people feel the need to jump on the "Barrera schooled Hamed" bandwagon that was started by the Americans. :roll:

 

That fight wasnt even close, you can call it a clear and comfortable win, no problem with me. But, he stepped into the ring with an elite fighter and got schooled, my opinion. It is clear from reading your posts that you are a big Hamed fan, I noticed on the thread in the general forum that this was your saddest boxing experience. Although I still wanted Hamed to win, I didnt feel too bad about it in the end, as he lost to a truly elite fighter and towards the end I didnt like the Hamed carried himself.

 

OK something non-Calzaghe, excellent. I feel Hameds prime was in 1995- the Robinson, Liendo, Angeles and Polo-Perez fights saw an astonishing blend of power and speed that made him seem frankly unbeatable. It was only when he noticably slowed down that he began to get tagged and this started against Medina.

Had a prime Hamed fought a prime Barrera we would have seen a similar fight to the one that took place only Hamed would not have been found with such regularity. He would have been harder to nail and the weeble moments that seemed to define that match up would have been missing. Prime Barrera was the circumspect surgeon not the windmill. Had Hamed fought the Windmill he would have KO'd Barrera. Could Hamed have had enough success to sway the judges in his favour or found the KO punch versus prime Barrera? I think so. He was incredible. His punch picking was amazing and i think that while it would intially be nip and tuck eventually Hamed would have made barrera come to him and when he did it Barrera's defence would have been exposed.

Prime Morales? Morales represents a different sent of questions to Barrera- his physical dimensions would have meant that Hamed would have constantly been on the end of his stinging salvo's of shots. His right hand was a KO punch and he had a canny knack of finding the fight ender even if it meant changing direction mid punch. He also had a iron chin. He would have been a real handful. Think Medina but more punishing and harder hitting. Hamed Morales would have been a tough fight as I feel Morales simply would not have allowed him to settle into a rythm easily. I could see Hamed really struggling here- even in his prime. For me its 50-50 but for the sake of British pride I go for Hamed to steal a tight one on points. I wouldn't fancy him for the stoppage.

Prime Marquez?

Marquez has had a very choppy career, occasionally brilliant- occasionally unremarkable. What I will say is that he's bloomed in more recent times but his tidy style is the perfect foil for Pac... would it be the solution to the Hamed puzzle? I don't think so. He like Barrera is very cautious in his approach- he seems to open up only when he feels he has to and Hamed would have been able to pick and choose when he was going to fire. I think that prime Hamed would have had the fire power to hurt him badly and would not have been there to be hit afterwards. I'd take Hamed o inflict a stoppage on Marquez in about 7 rounds.

Prime Pac???

Well Prime Pac appears to be a light welterweight- a place where his speed and power seem in perfect form against the slower opposition. That said he's always had a fair punch but that Barrera, Marquez and Morales were able to take his punches for the full 12 rounds spells that he didn't hit quite so violently down at 9st. His defence is a mess. He was always open to counters and Hamed would have found him I feel. He would have made Hamed work very hard but I think perhaps Hamed would have stoped him and early. It would have been dangerous but a 9st Pac is not the fighter he is at 10st.