23 year-old 'Prince' Naseem Hamed

Bungu was Hamed's best win in my opinion. He showed real style and skill in that fight. Picked him apart before taking him out, rather than going for heavy bombs exclusively.

 

nice

 

1. You asked for ATGs who left the sport after their first loss, I gave you a list, I didn't compare them or said Hamed was better than Hagler

2. Hagler didn't clean out MW, he didn't fight McCallum, Kalambay or Bomber Graham for 3

3. He didn't try too hard to get a Leonard rematch, Leonard said he could have one if he admitted he lost. He could have rematched Hearns or fought McCallum or Kalambay, loads of good fights, he went to make movies in Italy with a fake Italian accent instead

Mugabi Who did Mugabi beat in his career exactly

Now you're just showing off your ignorance. Not gone up in weight? He started at flyweight and his first title was at Bantamweight

Not in a war? See Kelley and Sanchez for that matter

You really don't have a clue what you're talking about do you?

 

If Hamed was a roided up cheat like americans and mexicans he would have become an ATG.

 

1. No - it was a cheap shot at Hagler when you know damn well that Hagler has pretty much cleaned up his weight division and was only sticking around to get Leonard. He was ALREADY ATG and not like Hamed who was trying to be ATG but quit.

2. Hagler could have stopped fighting around '85 after Hearns but continued just to wait out. Kalambay and Graham? Are you serious. It was 1987is by the time Kalambay has made a name for himself. And Mugabi was ranked higher than him. What did Graham do by 1987?

3. Come on, you know damn well the only reason he kept fighting after Hearns was for SRL.

4. You dismiss Mugabi but defend Kalamay and Graham? Are you kidding me. Both fighters, while being decent, where mostly doing home grown fighting until around 1986. I think both fought once outside of their country. Mugabi fought ain Europe, America, Europe again!

5. Learn to read, I said "level" meaning either or both weight or competition. He went up to MAB lost. Took a return bout of no consequence (really just for his own confidence) and quit.

I as said, I give you Kelly.

Some fans trying to explain his supposed physical deterioration make it sound like the guys has gone through his fare share of wars. You know what - he did go through a fare share of wars for a guy with 30 something fights. His fare share is nothing unusual even if you compare it to a mediocre fighter of his era. And the 2 examples you mention are both tough fights but they where also 4 rounders!!! Not like MAB, EM, JMM or Pac. Those guys went through wars that could explain their physical deterioration.

That does not really strengthen you position.

Cotto who is not ATG by most poeple's opinion - has had a better resume, in a war that took everything away from him - got back up twice and kept fighting.

So if Cotto is not ATG, there is no way in hell Hamed is ATG.

People are blinded by the showmanship (both in ring and outside) and not have actually gave his resume a good study.

 

At his best he is more than capable of beating MAB, EM, JMM or PAC, of that i am 100% sure, the version that fought MAB though could lose to all four but even that isn't guaranteed due to his power

Anyone that followed his career knows the difference, it was obviously a lot mental, but even physically he didn't look the same, worst condition i have seen him was the MAB fight (other than Calvo but no one takes notice of that fight)

 

Probably some truth to that

He is an ATG talent wise, and also unqiue, we wont see anyone like him again

 

I disagree. On his best days he will see the 12th round like he did with MAB against those great fighters.

Of course he has a punchers chance.

I think Hamed is comparable to Camacho and Tyson - flashy, supreme talent that had a decent resume for his weight class and generation but far from ATG (my ATG is Top 50 of all time).

 

You will disagree, you are like clinton v2

On his best days, they to a man would be lucky to see round 12, i love JMM but i know Naz has the power to stop him, goes without saying he could stop PAC at those weights and he'd be a nightmare for EM

 

He was not far from his best days when he fought MAB. I know his fans disagree and are trying to continuously try to rewrite history in order to protect the Naz' "ATG" image, but as I said - that is a just a coping mechanism why he failed with a true ATG.

I love how in ESB your prime is ends up being one round of one fight and anything after that is "not the same anymore". And always he could beat any x fighter if he was prime.

We are not talking RJJ here. If Naz physically declined, only if, then it was not some major cliff dive. He still had more than enough tools to beat MAB. The point is he did not. He declined mentally in terms of motivation? Sure. But if he did at 24-26 years, then I don't see how one can consider him ATG. Greatness is more than having physical gifts. There are dozens of fighters with physical gifts that barely make HoF, let alone ATG status. Part of greatness, if not the most important aspect of greatness is your mental prowess and strength. Camacho and Tyson are far more gifted than EM, JMM or MAB. If you can't get motivated in your first fight with true greatness then how can you get motivated for others?

Who is Clinton?

 

1. No it was in answer to your question 'which ATG retired after their first defeat?' The answer is Michael Spinks, Jim Jeffries, IMO Hamed and if you don't count his controversial losses Marvin Hagler retired after his first real defeat.

You're shifting the goal posts!!!

2. So Hagler could have stopped fighting after 6years as champ like Hamed stopped fighting after 6years of being champ? You're contradicting yourself. (NOTE: I don't debate Hagler beat better opposition, he was in a greater time)

Graham was 38-0 in '87, beating plenty of contenders

3. He was what 30 for Hearns, actually a Hearns rematch is in the picture, Leonard was retired on and off for 6 years and this is the only reason he stayed fighting, are you serious

4. Kalambay was 1 of the best middleweights of all time hands down, research him. Kalambay might well have beat Hagler. Mugabi was a hyped up journeymen. Are you actually trying to lose credibility by comparing Kalambay and Mugabi? Seriously?

5. Well okay but he'd cleaned out his division and for the record Marquez, Barrera and Morales all turned down paydays with him prior to the Barrera fight.

6. Deteriation isn't just through going through wars it's through you know deteriating. Fighters get worse, like Tyson and Duran lost their ability prior to going through wars, there's countless other examples

7. Cotto isn't on Hamed's level, although maybe he's borderline ATG, depending where you draw the line, he's certainly HOF

 

No way man. Kelley and Sanchez > Medina and Soto

 

If you follow Hamed's career it's in someway similar to Benitez. Huge talent, didn't train and follow through on it. Hamed was technically better from 94-96 and got worse after but became a bigger puncher after.

A documentary was made on the build up to Hamed-Barrera and Hamed clearly did little training in the footage. It was meant to show Hamed in a good light but it backfired really.

Comparing Tyson to Camacho underrates him. I think all 3 are massive talent that didn't quite fullfil themselves though