Naseem Hamed vs. Jim Driscoll

:d

 

He became flat-footed and predictable. He tended to load-up with his punches. The Barrera fight really showed Hamed's diminishing talent.

 

I know you wouldnt know this but you can't slip 1 punch and throw big counter shots without having good balance. Hameds balance was fine except when he made the amateur mistake of moving back in straight lines with his hands down, much like the way Driscoll does, and when he lept in with huge haymakers, if you jump in with a hayemaker you'll be off balance whoever you are

 

Speaking of Hamed's power. That kid could really hit like a ton of bricks. He really did short circuit an opponent when landing on them.

 

Devastating power.

 

Hamed's balance was all over the place when he was at his most effective as a boxer and a puncher (1995-98) When his balance was actually improved and he placed his feet in a more orthodox fashion, he wasn't the same fighter. He became more stationary and easier to hit, IMO. Throw in his hands down style, lack of waist and head movement, and you have a fighter who's prone to being tagged often. :good

 

Yep. Got to say that Steward great trainer that he is didnt suit Naz, he seemed to hate his style and want him to change completely which was really not going to happen by that stage and he ended up stuck in between, without fluid movement and with his hands down = there to be hit. Always was a bit but it became much worse. An interesting thing is that there was always a question over his chin but as he went into decline that question was answered emphatically, he had a good chin. Everytime I talk about him I just think of what could have been, he had all the tools to really really become a legend.

 

So you're saying he had good balance, even though he was, at times, off balance?

That's like saying a fighter has a good defence despite taking a lot of punches.

 

Its amazing, one of teh fighters that just amaze you. Only the greats do that.

 

Good balance and technique ? Bull**** , a shot Kelley exposed both his lack of fundamentals and his chin,Hamed had great reflexes and great power, he was distinctly average in every other department.

 

Since when was anyone saying Kelly was shot before the fight? He had 1 defeat at the time. If anything Hamed ruined him given he beat Gainer before Hamed and 7 months later lost to him

Each 1 of his KDs against Kelly were due to him getting countered or leaning backwards as a defensive tactic. Part of Hamed's game was to lean back with his hands down after throwing punches and then countering. I dont hear you talk about the defensive frailties and lack of balance of old times when they use the same tactics making the exact same mistakes. Driscoll for instance makesthe exact same mistakes

 

There was an article in the Ring prior to the Kelley fight stating he had declined.
How many times was Driscoll on the floor?
Or Tunney? Slattery?
Hamed was down more times in that fight than Driscoll was in his entire career.

 

A long way between 'declined' and 'shot', he was still world class and clearly performing well that night and world class wins the same year and thats why it was a big fight

Hamed went straight to exchange taking much more risks than Driscoll and getting those spectacular KOs as a result, when the punch missed though he was in no mans land. Plus counter punching, speed and punching power wasnt at the level it is now and the pace of the fights was generally slower. Tunney had a better defense and technique than Driscoll too

 

Two potential outcomes here: Hamed fights flat-footed and power-reliant as he did under Steward/Suarez, and Driscoll schools him; or, Hamed of the Ingle days fights up on his toes, bouncing about unpredictably looking to land those unorthodox, lethal counters that were generated from his legs with real power, and Driscoll schools hims.