Manny Pacquiao vs. Prince Naseem Hamed

Pac was actually always very big in the weight classes he fought being a big weight drainer. He was 147 in the ring in the second Marquez fight. Thats the same fight night weight Mayweather was fighting Judah/Baldomir at. Cotto is also a weight drainer, coming in at 160, hence there's a size difference. But Pacquaio fighting at 147 now isn't mcuh different to what Mayweather was doing, they're essentially fighting at the same weight

 

It's why I'm calling an end to the discussion...PP will say absolutely anything to fit in to his agenda. He's a huge Floyd Mayweather Jr supporter...whereas I don't have a particular taste for either of them.

 

Just like Lalonde didn't have to come down in weight. They came down in weight for money, it doesn't mean they weren't weakened. Coming down another 2lbs when you're already drained, is......DRAINING

Clottey didn't have to come down below 147, it was just DLH/Cotto, Roach said he could tell DLH was fecked

Hatton won more rounds against FMJ than Mosley/Corrales and I don't many/any have won more rounds than Hatton outside of DLH/Judah/Castillo

 

Again I'm saying what was said at the time. There was a forrest fire and MAB did claim it affected his camp for Pacquaio, start a thread on the General asking about it if you think I'm making it up. I'm not saying its a legit excuse, but you did ask :yep

PS nothing to do with FMJ, this is a Hamed-Pac discussion, I didnt bring up FMJ

 

Manny beat ten bells of **** out of Barrera at the peak of his powers, and it's a better win than anything on Floyd's resume. :good

 

So what you're saying is Pacs best win is not as good as Junior Jones best win then :yep

 

....This is what I mean when I said you'll say anything to suit your agenda. Barrera was an infinitely better fighter in 2003 than he was in 1997. Non-debatable.

 

huh.....this topic looks a lot like the general forum....i wonder..why

 

Yes older and above his best weight, the 1996 version was at his peak physically but not as smart, by 2000 he managed to combine the 2, after Morales 1 he never brawled in the same way again, why was that? By 2003 he was a little past his best and didn't want to go into the same type of war he would earlier in his career.

Come on Addie, you're a MAB fan, do you think the MAB that fought Morales in their second/third fights was as good as the MAB that fought him in their 1st, I sure as **** don't, that MAB was an animal. And don't you think the MAB that beat Mkkinney was already a great fighter already?

 

Great post. I scored Pac-JMM 1 to Pac by 115-112, I scored the second fight 114-114, but although we disagree on the results of those fights, I agree with pretty much everything else.

Hamed does not come close to Marquez in terms of all-round skillset, discipline or ring IQ. He would not have a chance of emulating JMM's success against Pac, he would be eating leather from the second the first bell rings till the referee or his corner stop the slaughter. The very idea that someone with Hamed's god-awful defence could even make it competitive with Pacquiao is just silly. Hamed would be on his back on the canvas as often as he would be on his feet.

 

Barrera showed a disturbing lack of will in the Pac fight.Maybe he had grown a bit soft coasting against washed up gimme's.

I tend to agree with power for once that the rawer younger version was better.Barrera lost a lot as a fighter once he he lost a step or two in speed and became more measured box-fighter imo.Not counting the necessary and impressive change in style for hamed of course.

 

Paq would have destroyed this over rated headcase ... mismatch ...

 

For me, Barrera peaked 2000-2001. I'd agree with Addie and would say he was a better fighter in 2003 than he was in 1997 though. MAB was more experienced, more versatile, and I'd say mentally stronger in '03. He was very good in his next two fights following the Pacquiao loss, against Ayala and Morales, and wasn't showing any signs of decline in easy victories over Tapia and Kelley beforehand. All in all, he was more assured in beating a better standard of opposition before and after '03 than he was when he was beaten twice by Jones.

 

I think this is what people are missing. Everyone keeps mentioning how Barrera dominated Hamed and how Pac destroyed Barrera, but Barrera HAD to change his style in order to beat Hamed. If there was such a huge gap in class this wouldn't have been necessary but Barrera clearly recognized how dangerous Hamed was and adjusted perfectly. Pac wouldn't, he would fight the same way and that definitely spells trouble for him. He may not lose, but Hamed is still a dangerous fight for him.

 

I can't see how Hamed is going to land on Pacquiao though. The speed difference is significant here, Pacquiao is a lot faster than Hamed and has much better movement. As long as Freddie drilled into him beforehand that he should be going in and out at pace, I can't see what Hamed is going to be able to do, other than ship punishment. The only way to beat a physical phenom like Pacquiao was at feather is to use skill and discipline, like Marquez was able to do. How is Hamed going to invite Pacquiao onto him then counter, when Hamed has no defence and no footwork? Pacquiao will be raining punches on the 5ft 3in tall, short-armed Prince, then whipping back out of range, then starting again, and Hamed doesn't have the skillset to change it up or throw Pac out of his groove. This would not be a close fight.