Manny Pacquiao vs. Naseem Hamed

good post! :good
i think most people here underrate pac's speed, power and workrate. they only see that pac will brawl and go straight to hamed and be hit.

 

The problem Pacman would have is he'd attempt to trade with Hamed. The warriors trait in him wouldn't have it any other way. That would be his downfall because he would end up getting knocked out. I'm assuming were talking about a well trained and conditioned Naz from say 1996 when he was at his best.

 

With all due respect you're full of **** when it comes to Hamed.
I laugh when I think of Hamed clowning with his hands by his sides against Pacquiao as it's a recipe for disaster.
Manny with his handspeed,reach advantage,and huge power would be able to tag Hamed clean with great regularity and I'd be very surprised if Hamed could stand up to this for round after round.
Naseem has a punchers chance but Manny's chin has gotten sturdier as he's developed and I doubt that Hamed would get enough punches off under Pacman's relentless attack to seriously bother him.
I'm a Hamed sceptic purely because I thought he was going to be an ATG and he didn't achieve nearly enough imo whereas Manny's already destroyed two great fighters so that's enough for me to favour him heavily.

 

"It's a style thang"

Pac's is a poor matchup vs Hamed. Simple.

 

Most people don't like Hamed, and are unfairly biased against him.

People normally dismiss him for 1 or both of the following reasons:

1. He was an arrogant outspoken dickhead

or

2. They haven't seen his fights before Kevin Kelley, by which time he was an accident waiting to happen (no pun intended).

 

no. pac will not attempt to trade with hamed. he will tag him first and if hamed can survive, that is where his chance is. imo, hamed's chances in this match-up is purely a puncher's chance. whereas pac, has the greater chance of ko due to his speed and workrate plus don't forget that he also has power though not as powerful as hamed.

 

Have you actually seen Hamed fight at his best?

You seem to be dismissing his skills, he was very elusive in 1996, and had great reflexes. He would have much more than just a punchers chance. You would know this if you saw him fight pre Kevin Kelley.

 

If only you'd read my next post, aahhhhh i dont know

 

Didn't I just see Barrera more than holding his own against one of the best in the world in JM Marquez recently.He looked to still have plenty in the tank to me and Manny cleaned him up 4 years ago.
Hamed's defense wasn't impervious to punishment and he'd still have to get inside Manny's danger zone if he wanted to land anything of his own given his reach disadvantage,and herein lies the risk.
Reflexes are fine but well rounded fundamental defensive skill allows you to avoid even more punishment and I'm not convinced Naz possessed those skills.
Look I don't want to wear the black hat and be the resident Hamed hater as I was a big fan of his when he fought (having first seen him in 1996 when I was in England) but he dissappointed me and I refuse to make him an automatic favourite over a class fighter like Manny.

 

Thanks for classing me as knowledgable (which compared to some of the good folks here yourself included, I'm not) and I wasn't trying to offend you or anyone but I just disagree with you on Hamed here.
I'm coming across as a hater in regards to Naseem,but I actually liked him a lot when he fought.His cockiness bugged me but I never thought it was nasty or malicious unlike a James Toney,but he could have done so much more with the ability and power he had rather than basically quit after a lone honourable loss to a great fighter.
I feel cheated by Hamed is all.

 

fighting at his best could have something to do with the level of his opponents. against local fighters, he seemed very elusive and can showboat his boxing skills. as he raised the level of competition, he is being exposed little by little.

so how do you think hamed will beat pac if they fought?

 

Where are people getting this "You can't trade with naseem" nonsense from? Kelley did and gave Hamed a beating. Alright, he lost, but it's Kevin kelley. Hardly a good fighter was he?

Put the Pacquiao of today in the exact same position Hamed was when he fought Kelley, and the fight wouldn't last 3 rounds. Pacquiao would waste him.

Pacquiao of 2007 is simply a better fighter than Hamed. He has more boxing skills and almost as much power. His straight punching would give hamed more problems than he could handle.

Pacquiao KO 7.

Morales and Marquez would also beat Hamed.

 

pac's chin is underrated

 

The biggest myth about Hamed was that he was exposed when he faced world class opposition. He wasn't exposed by Barrera, he was already finished way before he stepped in the ring against Barrera. It wasn't his level of opponents, Naseem was his own worst enemy. Not training, was what eroded his skills.

Watch his fights against Said Lawal, Steve Robinson or even Manuel Madina, then tell me if that is the same man who fought Barrara or Kevin Kelley. His reflexes were dull, he'd lost sharpness due to lack of training. This was not due to him being exposed against a greater of fighter. The clown you saw in the ring could'nt get away with the **** he did because he wasn't the same fighter, washed up at a scandelously young age. He wasn't made to look bad by the world class opposition, he was just plain out of condition and wasn't any good by the time you saw him.

Against Pacquiao, Hamed would simply beat him to the punch with his lightning reflexes and knock him out cold, early. Everyone will laugh and disagree with me here, but Hamed would have knocked the **** out of Barrera (just like Jones Jr), Morales and Pacquiao - had he fought them when he was actually any good. He would have been a legend, but instead he is just a has been and he has himself to blame for that.

 

This content is protected

You can't trade with the Naseem from 1996.
Kevin Kelley fought a washed up Hamed.