In 2004, Bernard Dunne vs Naz Hamed.. who wins?

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by lirva, Oct 25, 2010.


  1. FIN

    FIN Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,865
    1
    Mar 13, 2010
    Big Bernard Dunne fan,was there when he won the title in one of the best fights of the decade,this fight would never have happened in 2004,the best of Naz vs the best of Dunne wouldnt go 3 rounds,Naz by brutal knock out,you cant have a weak chin if your going up against Naz..
     
  2. duagre

    duagre Active Member Full Member

    684
    0
    Jun 4, 2010
    This is the second thread today I have seen with you taking cheap shots at Dunne. Have an axe to grind do we???

    Look Naz was a great fighter. A fantastic fighter, who in my opinion is underrated. A lot of people try discredit Naz because of the Barrera loss. He lost to Marco Antonio Barrera: God he must be terrible. No, he had an absolutely terrific career.

    And yes, a prime Naz would have likely ran through Dunne. But to go with your scenario, it wouldn't be a prime Naz. It would be Naz coming back from a couple of years lay off. Naz looked a long way from his best against Manuel Calvo in his last fight. None of us have any idea what type of fighter he would have been after the time out of the ring. A lot of guys arent the same when they come back.

    Bernard Dunne was a WBA and European champion and nobody can take that away from him. The fact that he might come up short against a great fighter like Hamed is nothing to be embarrassed by anyway.
     
  3. jackie chan

    jackie chan New Member Full Member

    24
    0
    May 1, 2006
  4. lirva

    lirva Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,335
    97
    Jul 7, 2010
    I never said Dunne should be embarrassed to lose to Naz at all. I took no "cheap shots" at Dunne. I said that Egan is a better boxer than him and that Naz would have embarrassed him in the ring and KO'd him. Who can disagree with both comments? The Dunne fans seem to like being seen as being victimised on the forum. Dunne takes a lot of "Dunne bashing" according to them. however, the "dunne bashing" is merely people talking truthfully and honestly about Dunne.

    Dunne was WBA champ, but everyone knows he wasn't the real WBA champ, come on now mate.
     
  5. duagre

    duagre Active Member Full Member

    684
    0
    Jun 4, 2010
    Lets be honest, you just went on a diatribe about how nobody is Dunne bashing, but then insisted on trying to discredit his title win in the very next line.

    I just don't see the point in it to be honest. Dunne is retired. The mention of him in these threads served no other purpose that to undermine his career. What was his relevance to a topic about Ken Egan turning pro exactly? They both happen to be Irish. The similarities end there. Egan was and is a good amateur fighter. Dunne was a good (not as accomplished as Egan) amateur and also a good pro fighter(something Kenny has no experience at). It's not comparable.

    Why make such an effort to belittle the guy? Nobody ever claimed Bernard was a surefire hall of famer. He was a good pro who had a very successful career.
     
  6. moorser

    moorser Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,807
    193
    Jan 8, 2009

    Dunne defended the belt against Poonsawat on sep 29th

    Cabbalerro last defended that belt on 26th august, Poonsawat beat dunne who got beat by Ryol li lee who is now the "offical wba champ" so Dunne was the WBA champ in my eyes and like every other holder of IBF , WBA , WBC and WBO belts he was just another "paper champ".
     
  7. Strongback

    Strongback Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,420
    10
    Nov 6, 2009
    I absolutely hated Naz with a passion. To this day I can't stand the little *****.

    I would however say he was not just a hype job and has some excellent wins against better opposition than say a fighter like Ricky Hatton fought.

    Naz was good but Barrera was better. I neary started believing in God again that night.


    Dunne wasn't in Naz's league but an older Hamed with the confidence knocked out of him might not have been a great force. That's probably why he never made a comeback.
     
  8. lirva

    lirva Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,335
    97
    Jul 7, 2010
    The relevance behind the Dunne vs Egan comparison was the money that Dunne made from the pro ranks compared to the potential money Egan could make, considering he is better than Dunne. I thought that was obvious but maybe I should point these things out so the Dunne fans can't cry "dunne bashing".

    At the time, Dunne was gifted a WBA title shot, when there was already a WBA champion. To say you recognise him as a champ is to say you condone that type of conduct by the organisations. I'm not "discrediting" his title win... I'm just telling the truth, which seems to be called "dunne bashing" on this forum.
     
  9. duagre

    duagre Active Member Full Member

    684
    0
    Jun 4, 2010

    What exactly is the basis.

    And with regard to your other point, see moorser point. I pretty much echo what he said. It was no less a title than any other alphabet belt. wba like to insist on having a super champion; that's their prerogative and not Dunne's fault.
    Cabbalerro had lost to Cordoba and is too busy chasing Gamboa around to defend his super bantam title.

    We could go back on forth on this all day so i will leave it at that.
     
  10. lirva

    lirva Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,335
    97
    Jul 7, 2010
    No problem disagreeing on the validity of Dunne as a champion. The WBA made Caballero the super champ and allowed Dunne vs Cordoba for the regular title. Not something I like to see as a fan and not something I can condone and celebrate. But each to his own.

    On the Egan point, I was questioning why he doesn't turn pro when he could make massive amounts of money (as Dunne has), but he would make even more as he is better than Dunne. Surely it's an obvious point.

    Dunne was a decent fighter. Not good enough to compete with the best though.
     
  11. misticmonk

    misticmonk Active Member Full Member

    1,225
    0
    Jul 7, 2010

    Dunne kept his head and got the most from his talents, Naz lost the head and squandered his talent. Naz was way more skillful but I would happably wager the Dunne is more content with how his career went.
     
  12. ashishwarrior

    ashishwarrior I'm vital ! Full Member

    34,376
    11,881
    Apr 19, 2010
  13. portside

    portside Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,013
    0
    Feb 25, 2010
  14. loughlan

    loughlan Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,896
    0
    Feb 9, 2010
    How can you possibly know that Egan would have been a better pro than Dunne? How do you know he would have had the right mentality and confidence needed to make it as a pro, two things Dunne most certainly had. There have been many instances where a great amateur did not make it in the pro ranks, look at Paul Griffin and Michael Carruth, both were better amateurs than Dunne (who was no slouch himself) but they did not get as far as him as professionals, so to say that Egan would have been better is mere speculation.