Let's rewind. What I mean by that is, let's assume the fight hasn't happened yet and draw our conclusions on what could possibly happen based on each fighters last performance. This is commonplace for ESB nowadays. A fighter only seems to be as good as their last fight. The results may prove interesting. Marco Antonio Barrera has just devastated former World Champion Jesus Salud in a very impressive showing. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARCvHWCa09I[/ame] [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP7vj1fDTPA[/ame] Hamed had a tougher ride against Augie Sanchez, being knocked down and hurt early on during the fight. He eventually recovered to stop his opponent in brutal fashion. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlQ6l3un48Q[/ame] Based on their respective fights leading up to their inevitable showdown, who would you have favoured to win between Barrera and Hamed in 2001? What kind of fight would you expect? Would Hamed have been blasted on the General Forum for his indifferent showing against Augie Sanchez? What would peoples views be on Barrera? He looked impressive but against a faded foe down at 122lbs.
Their previous fights was not the point, Nas had this Aura around him that his punch was super natrual, if he hit you, you were going to sleep, MAB had been knocked out in the past by Junior Jones, who didn't punch like Hamed. HBO was invested in Hamed, he was exciting, he was undefeated and he was knocking people out. The casual fan looked at this and thought Naseem would get Marco sooner or later. Hardcore fans knew that MAB was the better ring general and that would be the key, although very few people expected former all guts sterotypical Mexican MAB, to become a master boxer puncher, and dominate what at the time, was a P4P star.
You've missed the point entirely! :twisted: I'm asking you to come to a conclusion based on these two fights alone. If you can't do that then I'd ask you to leave the thread and not come back.
I'm sorry Mum :blood MAB looked more impressive, at a lighter weight against a faded opponent. Hamed did not look great either, against a limited opponent who he should of had no trouble with. Looking at the two fights, MAB looks like the much better fighter. (Am I allowed to mention that you'd have to bear in mind that he'd be moving up in weight to fight Nas, and that Hamed did show his punching power in the previous fight? Or is that outside the rules of your thread?)
So you are doing history revision via an extremely narrow view? What is the point of the thread and analysis if it is incomplete?
Previous fights are complete cawk! The idea of this thread was to get an idea of how the General would have viewed the Barrera/Hamed match-up had the forum been around at the time. Like I say, fighters seemed to be judged almost purely on their last fight nowadays. Martinez was a P4P monster before he struggled with Barker, now he seems to be "borderline worldclass" according to some. Holy dunkin' dog ****! I'm asking people to come to a conclusion on how the fight would have gone based on their last performances alone. I'm not saying Marco should have gone into the fight as favourite, there are obviously other factors to consider. This thread isn't saying anything, it's merely asking a couple of questions of you. Answer them the best you can. Thank you.
It's a hard one to pick because both fighters did what fans knew they could do. Naseem often showed weaknesses in his fights but at the same time, he had ferocious power and that was enough to win bouts, as was the case against Sanchez. On the other hand, Barrera got his head down, showed great punching ability and beat a guy in the fashion you'd expect him to. Both performances almost exemplify what the fighters did in the majority of their careers and for that reason, it's hard to answer this question. Assuming Barrera vs. Naseem was happening next week, I'd be conflicted and that's mainly because of the questions about Naseem. I'd be expecting Barrera to win rounds off, make him look poor at times but then I'd also be considering the explosive power and asking myself whether that was enough for Naseem, like it was in many of his fights. I go back to the questions about Naseem because I'd also be wondering if anyone could take his power - As crazy as it sounds now, there would be a case to argue a quick Naseem knockout or maybe even such power that he'd hit Barrera and the Mexican would change his mentality. Both were great performances in their own way and yet almost completely opposite. Barrera did what he did and Naseem did what he did. They weren't the best wins or best performances of eithers career, but they do give you an impression of both fighters strengths and, mainly in the case of Naseem, weaknesses. I'm delaying answering this question a bit too much I'd probably favour Barrera because I'd imagine he'd be too good offensively. I would have a hard time picking though, that's for sure, and I could easily sway from one to the other. I'd guess my confidence would be 60/40 in Barrera's favour. I tend to favour solid fighters over unorthodox ones and I guess that's where my slight advantage to Barrera stems from.
Thank you for successfully answering the thread question, Jack! One thing though. I do think Salud was one of Marco's best performances.
He looked impressive, yeah. It's a tough question to answer properly I think, mainly because both fights offer so many contrasts, so it's hard to effectively predict a result. I can imagine flipping between 'Naseem KO' and 'Barrera points' or even 'Barrera stoppage' many times. That indecision says a lot about how good Barrera was on the night. He wasn't up against a fighter with no hope and yet he made him look like one. Excellent performance.
The reason I made the thread was because nowadays I think fighters are judged almost purely based on their last performance. At least among General Forum regulars. Had the forum existed back in 2001, I wouldn't have been surprised if the general consensus would have had Barrera winning comfortably. He certainly looked like the better fighter in there against Salud. I'm not sure 4lbs would have been looked upon as the difference between winning and losing.
In all honesty i would think the same way as i did back then, were i thought Naz could get the job done after being made to look silly on occasion and possibly visiting the canvas. Which was nothing new for Hamed at the time. Infact i thought there would be less mistakes from him, due to the significance of the fight, i thought he would be more up for it and more focused. Even though i knew just how good Barerra was, i couldn't imagine a come forward fighter like him avoiding Hamed's bombs for the full distance. Little did i/we know MAB would adopt a totally different approach for the fight and bamboozle Naz. After the Junior Jones defeats Barrera rebuilt his career well and looked very good in the Salud fight. But i had seen those defeats for Barrera and Naz of course was unbeaten, so my main thought was Naz would find a way with his power even if he was struggling. It's funny i didn't watch it again until about 7-8 years later, and when i did i was still waiting for Naz to land something big! But he couldn't dent MAB, infact he never had more than a minutes success. MAB was excellent that night. His gameplan was carried out perfectly, his defence was super tight and the extra speed he had from the lower weight was very evident. Great performance stepping up a weight against a monster puncher.
Naz by TKO in the 4th. Mab is your typical come forward face first Mexican brawler. Hamed does have chin issues though and Mab has power. So Mab atleast has a puncher's chance. Mark my words. This fight is definetely not going the distance.
I already thought Barrera was going to win the fight, but based off of different reasons. I thought he was a great in-fighter and would be a better at cornering and using head movements. He also had a great chin where as Hamed showed himself to be chinny. I thought Hamed could be outboxed as well, but I didn't expect Barrera to do it.