Manny Pacquiao vs. Prince Naseem Hamed

Pacquiao by TKO. Hamed's defence is dire and he would have no answer by Pac coming in and out, unloading lightning fast volleys of punches. This would not be a close fight, the gap in skill level is too big.

 

This guy never, ever fails to disappoint.

 

Hamed is getting pretty underrated on 1 loss, that there is video evidence he wasn't training properly for. He's another boxer who had the world at his feet, with 100million in the bank and got arrogant and complacent. At his peak he was epic BUT made bad technical errors his reactions and speed let him get away with, Pacquaio also makes big technical errors his speed lets him get away with, but is more 'technically sound'. Pacquaio is predictable, Hamed is not. Hamed is 2 handed, FW Pac is 1 handed. Both are there to be hit. Pacquaio has more speed, Hamed better timing. Pacquaio more stamina, Hamed more power

 

Yes because Pacquaio has no skill, all athleticism. Popkins is going to cry when Pac gets schooled and beat up again :|

 

And Pacquiao proved all of this against Barrera, Morales, Marquez, Cotto, Hatton, Clottey...

And Hamed proved all of this against Steve Robinson, Augie Sanchez, Kevin Kelley, Paul Ingle...


These guys are two completely different levels of fighter.

 

You mean Pacquaio fought shot fighters and B Class opposition, whoopy do, we all know Pac can't win unless he's fighting another fighters left overs. Pacquaio didn't prove to be anything more than being a decent punch bag against Marquez

 

Hamed hit twice as hard as Pac at feather (where Pac was still inexperienced).

Hamed in 5 rounds, after hitting the deck once himself.

 

Is this post even serious? I'm past caring to be honest, you're a waste of a username, everyone thinks you're a joke and it's pretty obvious why.

 

:|:|:| He speaks the truth about my fave fighter. Truth hurts doesn't it :yep You'll be crying again on Nov 13th :yep

 

Come on PP, i' m on record on certain threads sticking up for you and calling you a good poster, which you are most of the time, but **** making excuses for fighters' losses, **** is weak.

 

this is really some genuinely general forum pimp c quality posting

come on now

 

I'm not making excuses but that wasn't Hamed at his best, have you watched the documentary leading up to the fight with all Hameds tooling around? I forget the name of it

Regardless it is only 1 loss, nearly all fighters have losses, it doesn't make them bad fighters

Obviously a quality masterclass of a win by MAB with a great gameplan, MAB also had a great style to beat Hamed with his defensive skill. He wisely never looked to exchange

Pacquaio/Morales are different styles of fighter who are very open to engage, that suits Hamed. I'll admit its possible Pacquiao's better foundamentals and speed could be a factor in his favour none the less

 

I'm only ****ing with the cry baby Pacquaio nuthugger amongst us

 

Yeah, i've seen the doc, it's been on tv shitloads, what you're saying is plausible I SUPPOSE, but i just don't think like that and i gotta stay consistent, nahm sayin?! He had time to prepare and all that other **** i mean.

 

I'm not defending PowerPuncher's post, but I think it's hilarious that you refuse to acknowledge that significant negative factors can effect a fighters' performance and thus the outcome of a fight.
What would you say if someone argued that Duran was at his best or close to it in all the 16 fights he lost and would always have lost to those opponents?

By the way, I confidently pick Barrera to beat Hamed peak for peak too.