As much as i hated Naz, in his prime, he is very under-rated

i'll change it.

 

dont bother, i'll revert back to my monzon avatar.:good

 

Have a look at MAB's resume, look at the list of fighters he beat en route to meeting Pac in 2003, then tell me he wasn't peak. :-(

Two names - MARQUEZ and BARRERA - that's two more than Hamed. :smoke

Paul Ingle? Robbie Peden was a better fighter, he just was. If you disagree fair enough, but Peden stopped Campbell twice, and Campbell's one of the best lightweights in the world now. You just cannot say Ingle is comparable.

Morales lost to Raheem because the fight was at 135 and Erik couldn't handle 135, much like Hatton couldn't handle 147. To say that version of Erik wasn't a tougher proposition than Medina or Johnson or Kelley is just ridiculous. Have you seen the 2nd Pac fight? Morales lost, but he fought like a lion. The bias and agenda going on here is quite fantastic from you mate.

I've never said McKinney was better than Hamed, I don't know why you go to lengths to prove that. However, McKinney was a very good fighter. On that we can agree. It was he Barrera beat to win his 1st world title - Hamed beat Steve ****ing Robinson. Again, the difference in resume and quality is obvious.

You can write post after post after post challenging my semantics, but the fact is as true now as it was when I wrote my initial post: Hamed never fought an elite level fighter til he fought Barrera, and he lost. The 2 best fighters he fought were Bungu and Kelley, both very good fighters, but not top level. Barrera and Morales mixed in elite level company more often, and their resumes are far better, their careers are far better, and Naz is often sorely overrated.

The End. :good

 

done mate dont worry

 

IMO his opponents were well chosen, Barrera being the only top echelon fighter he faced. Most were decent club fighters. period

 

I have never argued that MAB and Morales do not have better resumes, you were the one with the agenda and that has been shown up by how you picked and choosed how you wished to class an opponent. First it was who was an elite name, then who was tougher at the time.

You used McKinney as an example of a great name on a resume when he is neither a tougher fight or better name than Kelley, Johnson, Medina, Ingle, Bungu or Soto.
And the facts support that. Peden was dangerous...so was Sanchez. Sanzhez had banged out your boy McKinney and whilst no way near top tier was a vicious puncher.

Hamed is not overrated by many, as most seem to think he fought "bums" until fighting MAB and even more seem to think that the guy who fought in the US swinging for the fences with one punch was the same fighter who made his name at Super Bantam and early on as a Feather.

Regardless of comp, it should be clear just from videos that he did not even TRY to fight how he used to do later in his career.

 

:rofl :rofl

So HOF shoe in Manuel Medina, 12 defences of IBF title Boom Boom Johnson, Olympic Gold medalist and World Champion Bungu, World Champion Soto (who beat Castillo and Espinosa) and 3 weight multi time World Titlist Vazquez were "club fighters".

Which club is that?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by PACFAN84
I think the guy is spectacularly OVERRATED on this forum.

- He never beat one elite level fighter in his entire career
(compare this to Barrera and Morales...

Barrera: McKinney, Hamed, Morales (twice), Tapia, Ayala, Peden, Juarez


:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

I stopped reading at that. So Robbie Peden is "elite" and Ayala is "elite"? Best of all you have Kennedy McKinney as elite, a guy who lost twice to Bungu. And yet Hamed never faced a single elite fighter according to you.




Can I just point out that my post states Hamed never fought one elite level fighter - and then I compare it to a selection of the best wins on the resumes of Barrera and Morales? Since you are so keen to quarrel over semantics, then please see that NOWHERE do I say Hamed never fought an elite fighter but look at all the elite fighters MAB and Morales fought, here they are...

- The FACT is that Hamed never did fight an elite fighter til MAB
- The FACT is that a list of the best wins of MAB and Morales SHAMES Hamed's res.

I think the point has been proven.

 

pacfans alright, he does know his stuff, just gets a bit over-the-top with his views and put downs. i actually like the guy.

 

WHEN did Hamed fight them???? Other than Bungu they were well, well past-prime. That doesn't mean anything like the same as beating young, hungry, quality fighters like Barrera and Morales did. And you are overrating Medina greatly on this thread IMO.

 

Kelley was pretty much peak. Soto was not peak but not "well, well past prime" either. Johnson was still world champion and on his way down but again not well past it.
Vazquez was indeed well past it.

But I wasn't addressing you, I was talking to one of the typical ignorant fools who thinks that everyone before MAB was crap.
He didn't say they were "past it". He described the entire competition pre MAB as "club fighters". You would not describe a faded or shot great as a club fighter in any discussion.

He will do a bit of google research now, realise he was talking out of his arse and pretend he did indeed mean they were not all peak.
And as I have said, Pac has barely fought anyone in their peak either. You can argue closer in some cases, but only Marquez was peak.

 

Yes, OK, keep laughing, Hamed has a great resume, as good as Barrera's or Morales's, I'm being so unfair on Steve Robinson and Paul Ingle (both world class), and Vasquez, Medina and Johnson (young hungry go-getters). There, sanity restored. Wow, don't know what got into me there!!

 

Again, look at Barrera's resume in the years on the way to facing Pacquiao first time. Get a hold of those fights if you haven't seen them or can't remember them. That was undoubtedly ABSOLUTE PEAK Barrera - he was p4p#3 with The Ring at the time. This really cannot be debated amigo, seriously.

 

So let me get this right, you didn't mean they were elite? You just thought that a sensible way to argue was to say that Hamed had never fought anyone elite and then as a comparison show some of the opponents of other guys like MAB and Morales, but not necessarily the elite ones?:roll: Please.

If you did then sorry for misinterpreting you, but that is primarily your fault, as any reasonable person would read that as being "Look he never fought an elite, now compare these guys and check the elites on their record".

Because if that was not what you meant that why mention the non elite fighters at all? Or if it was just notable wins, then why mention that Hamed had not fought elite and instead say "Look at his notable wins in comparison to MABs notable wins" and then do an objective comparison?

 

It can be debated and it is being. Calzaghe is top 3 p4p in the Ring now.
Tsyzu was p4p top 2 in Ring when Hatton fought him, I bet you don't think Kostya was at his peak do you?