Hamed fizzled out mentally because he was embarrassed horribly. His antics looked so thoroughly amateurish against a well schooled professional fighter. He couldn't accept in his mind that he could be outclassed like that. So instead of picking himself up he went to go relax in his mansion. Weak, but I can't say I can blame him.
Whether I always agree with him or not, Thread stealer is one of the most knowledgable posters on these forums.
Yes, he was past his physical prime when he beat Manny, he had slipped. Manny improved as a fighter though, he just retreated in linear line just made for Erik's return attacks. Stop treating it like one size fits all. Example: Imagine Jake LaMotta was in his physical prime, but for the last couple of years, his head wasn't in the game anymore, he became very sloppy. He never returned to form. Aaron Pryor was still in his physical prime but mentally he wasn't in the game anymore. Whitaker didn't have the motivation for a fight against some contender towards the end, looked terrible and even lost one IMO, but when he got ODLH fight, lights on... Hamed just got worse and worse leading to the Barrera fight. I guess all of the fighters here are autistic. You haven't lived if you don't understand this logic, it's not even boxing specific.
So what? So am I. I'm not disrespecting him, his points are completely incorrect..whether he's knowledgeable on boxing or not doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about with regards to Hamed, and given his post, obviously he doesn't.
Actually his point was pretty much spot on. You however made the claim that Kelley was a near p4p fighter when Hamed fought him. While Kelley was a tough customer at 122 and 126, he was never ranked higher than the fifth best featherweight in both 96' and 97'. Does that make the top 5 foghters in every division close to being p4p fighters as well? You seem very pasionate about Hamed and I can respect that. He seems to get sold short by many on boxing forums. But objectively looking at things Thread stealer is not wrong. He in no way put Hamed down, just pointed out what is obvious to most fans of the sport including commentators and other fighters. While his style was exciting, as was his power, his bad habits as pointed out would always be his downfall against a fighter like Barrera who wouldnt fall for Naseems style.
The same way all those Cubans schooled him in the amateurs? They could not beat him as an amateur so they must be able to beat him as a pro because Cubans get so much better in the pros.atsch
Martin Murray had the best claim to be the lineal champion at 160. Cotto refuses to fight at the weight limit. He beat a 40 year old Martinez with nothing left and sits on the lineal title. Murray was robbed of a win against a more live version of Martinez. Then GGG blasts him. It's not a stretch to say GGG's victory over Murray is better than Naseem's victory over Kelley. And the rest of their resume is quite similar. Whether you like it or not Hamed was exposed once he faced a tip top quality fighter. And I feel like many think the same would happen to GGG. How many times do we have to hear that Ward would expose Golovkin? Hell, there is an active thread on it right now on these boards!!!!!!!
You're making too much of divisional rankings IMO. Kelley was 5th but he had wins over no.2 (Espinoza) and no.8 (Gainer) in great displays, as well as being on a very good winning streak beating other good featherweights. Kelley himself was a P4Per albeit no.10 a while ago but remained a top fighter although the loss to Gonzalez a time earlier hampered his ranking. I had given reasons where T.S was wrong earlier, the fault is my own for saying he's 'completely' incorrect. Commentators etc. also note that his knockdowns were from sloppiness particularly in balance. Hamed gets a lot of **** because he was a ****y little fighter (and of Arab descent). His banter had no malice in it, but there's always going to be a group people who don't understand that. Yeah, he's my favourite fighter of all time lol. It's funny how this thread is about GGG and Hamed. One is pure textbook, the other isn't. One has the best balance of any fighter I've probably ever seen, the other doesn't.
Here are the similarities. 1. They both have power 2. They both walk around like they are future ATG's. 3. They both have never proven to stand their ground against a top level fighter. GGG hasn't fought one and when Hamed got his chance he failed horribly.
Emanuel also said that he didn't think Hamed would have been able to cope with Morales or Marquez. For what that's worth.
Can't say for sure, because he hasn't done it yet. Which is why this should of been done at least five years prior to see if it's just hype.
Look, I never said you were completely off. But Hamed balance issues were directly attributed to his style. Naz is also one of my favorite fighters but I cant overlook that particular glitch in his game that I think would have caused problems with not only Barerra, but Marquez and Morales as well. All three had great timing and that was the way to beat the man. As far as haters go, there are many for every fighter no matter what. I will say this though, in spite of his knockdowns I dont think Naz had a bad chin. The guy was a phenom, but even phenoms have faults and you have poited out a few yourself. Gotta work now, will catch up with this thread later.