How Would You Rate Naseem in his Prime?

Hamed was better than Zab though and had a cast iron chin

Legacy wise Hamed is ahead of Tyszu, Corrales, Castillo of this era. He cleaned out an entire division at featherweight and fought champions from lower weight classes.

Ability wise at his prime Hamed was the very elite and better than the limited Pacquiao who he would have certainly KO'd. Hamed would have done better against Morales than he would Barrera and could have KO'd Morales. Hamed was 1 of the best P4P punchers in the sport

 

Hamed got lazy, stopped boxing and just tried to smash his opponents head off when he left Ingle.

He did the above because he was a bellend.

I've never seen anyone make fools of decent boxers like Hamed though, I don't know how great he was but he was pure entertainment at his peak.

 

Hamed was very good in his prime. I think he looked his absolute best when fighting Robinson.

 

7 out of 10.

 

I'd rate him 8/10. He was one of those fighters who had the potential to be a legend and didn't make the most of it. He was already well past his best by the time he lost a close decision to Barrera (had started trying to bang everyone out with one shot, neglected his footwork, reflexes and defence). If you saw the documentary Little prince, Big Fight, it exposed his terrible training habits. Basically, he was never as good as he could have been for these reasons. He peaked very early, like about 22/23. The big disappointment for me is that he never went back to the drawing board, came back and tried to avenge his defeat, which all the great fighters did. I think some people let the fact that he's a complete **** colour their view of him as a fighter. At the end of the day, the guy dominated 126lbs for 6 years, he was a hell of a boxer in his prime.

 

It's jst so sad that he showed his true colors and let a single defeat at the hands on of the best in the world just completely crush him.

 

Naz=Vic Darchinian. Either fighter around a 7 out of 10. Unorthodox exciting fighters that got decimated when fighting a high quality fundamental boxer with decent power. To say that he could have been this or that is utter crap, because when rating a fighter we have to base it soley on what the fighter did, not what he "could have done". In the end who did Hamed ever beat that was an alltime great? Thats right- NO ONE! Who did Hamed ever fight that was a top 20 P4P fighter at the time he fought them? One- Barrera who kicked his ass. In fact when you look at Hamed's accomplishments, the fact is he is a middle of the road belt holder.

 

I answered the question in the second sentence 7 out of 10. For someone saying that my post is simplistic, its kind of funny that you seem to have a hard time reading.

 

Naseem Hamed was a total one-off. Never seen a fighter absolutely embarasses world-class opposition so effortlessly before. Even Roy Jones Jnr has his work cut out to compete with Naz.

In terms of pure talent, he's probably one of the best there ever was. But he let it go to his head and he never achieved what he could've, no doubt splitting from Brendan Ingle hurt his career a lot.

 

I suppose I was trying to justify my rating of 7/10 which is somewhat lower than the majority of people think. In the end I find it difficult to base an opinion on fighters on anything other than their biggest fights and what they did on the big stage under the brightest of lights. To me this is the biggest factor in determining a fighters true ability. So from my point of view there is unfortunately very little to judge Hamed on.