Hi Amer You conveniently didn't mention that almost every opponent he faced had a losing record, he only ever won once by stoppage, he could never get to any decent level, and he retired because he knew was never gonna get anywhere. Good for him on the other stuff, but I only ever saw him in the ring and he was an absolutely terrible garbage boxer like 90% of Ingle fighters are
You are far too sensitive over any criticism of the Ingle gym. Galahad and Rhodes aren't even world champions and Brook is nowhere near a British ATG.
It's hilarious the excuses over Hameds loss to Barrera, they are the most pathetic excuses. Hamed got outclassed from start to finish it was a very one sided fight, a mismatch. He was never on Barreras level. Barrera could face him 100 times and he'd win 100 times. There's levels.
Brook in terms of resume isn't anything special but at his peak his ability and size at 147 was a beast that no one wanted a piece of until later on. Brooks resume is nowhere near as good as it could have been. But for about a 2 year period imo Brook was top dog at 147
Yeah, big fan. Boxing is about punching other people and not getting punched back. That's where the skill is. Sadly these days boxers aren't in fashion and "brawlers" and people who throw lot but land little are in fashion. Genuinely think Galahad and hughie fury won there fights. Maybe just but landed more and made there opponent miss. Hit and not be hit...
Buy that's the problem with every fighter mentioned here it's "in my opinion brook was top dog, I'm my opinion Hamed was an atg" These boys all had real issues when it came to proving it.
And who REMEMBERS those champions now? To be an all time great you have to have all time great wins What are hameds all time great wins? Ypu have to have standards, and Hamed was a good world champion but he is no all time great and the only time he FACED one he took a schooling of historically epic proportions.
Depends on what ur judging.. If ur judging his resume or his ability when he was at his peak.. There can be huge differences.. Ie I never had to look at ggg's resume to know how good he was at his peak...ggg is an atg in terms of ability but not in terms of resume
I always judge on a combination of both. In GGG'S case he genuinely had no competition except Alvarez who avoided him so you can't blame him. In hameds case there was LOADS of top names and you can't make excuses for every one of them not happening. And again capitulation meekly in your own fight vs an elite prime champion, nah that's not the stuff ATG are made of Never had the minerals to keep going after that either. I don't rate him
Look the point you make about GGG is valid and i agree GGG has easily been possibly my fave fighter over the last 7 years or so but you cannot accept the reasons why GGG's resume isnt as good as it should be but not accept the reasons why Hameds resume isnt as good as it should have been. You fail to accept Hamed not being in the Ingle gym and completely of the ball during that part of his career, which means there is hypocrisy in your argument. Hamed was an ATG in terms of ability at his peak, Barrera didnt fight Hamed when Naz was at his peak. Thats not to say Barrera wouldnt have beaten Naz at his peak but thats hardly an insult. Barrera is another ATG and there is certainly no shame in losing to him. If you fail to acknowledge that then there is no point in continuing this. Hamed should be ashamed of himself for the way he ended his career he messed it all up on his own, but proud of what he was at his peak. and this is purely all just about his boxing were talking about before even mentioning what he did for the sport in terms of bringing in a fanbase, making boxing relevant and selling the sport. He was the sports dream, he sold the industry himself.
I remember Tom "Boom Boom" Johnson defending his title 10 times before Hamed knocked him out. Wilfredo Vazquez is on the ballot for the Hall of Fame.
Serious question, what would you require from Loma from the rest of his career to be considered an all time great. He hasn't had any all time great fights and hasn't beat anyone who comes close to being an ATG in the pro ranks. Or would his amateur pedigree add to the argument of making him an ATG in your view?
As I said with golovkin I make exception if there was no avaliable ATGS to fight Hamed had plenty, he fought one and got humiliated.
