Naseem Hamed vs. Ricky Hatton (historically)

Naz talent > Ricky's resume.

 

As I said, write to the BBC.

 

Your assuming rather then looking at facts.

Against a good opponent Naz looked talentless.

Against Locket, Pavlik looks like god, against Calzaghe he may not!

Talent...oponents make boxers look talented...

 

I trust the people on here over the BBC, some of them picked Hatton to beat Mayweather

 

A huge amount of people on here had Lacy beating Calzaghe.


We just have differing opinions...that doesn't make someone a clown, by the way.

 

Well those "idiots" are the ones making a decent aegument rather than throwing insults around.

Lennox Lewis fought and beat better fighters than Rahman. Mike Tyson fought and beat better fighters than Douglas.

Hamed fought one elite fighter in his career and got schooled.

There's a difference. A big difference.

Maybe. He's certainly more talented to the untrained eye.

Just out of interest though, what if, hypothetically, Ike Ibeanuchi was more talented than Muhammad Ali? Despiye Ali having the greatest resume of all-time at heavyweight, would Ibeabuchi rank above him? No chance.

Talent isn't important. What is important is resume and for that, Hatton > Hamed.

 

Right, because Ike's talent would not be enough itself to overcome Ali's resume. What is important is performance in regard to competition, Naz looked far superior to his opponents then Ricky did, though Ricky's opponents may be slightly superior to the competition Naz faced. Naz performance against slightly inferior competition is enough to overcome Ricky's advantage in resume.

 

The quality of opponents make fighters look good. If Calzaghe fought Mafredo again tomorrow he would look immense again (every one would be harping on), if he fought Hopkins again he would probably look terrible (everyone would say joe is gone).

Beating shite opponents, convincingly, means nothing talent wise, imo.

Talent is also fighting out the clinch and on the inside like a demon, as much as it is doing the flashy stuff...

 

Hamed will always have an advantage in that sense though. Assuming Roberto Duran and Pernell Whitaker are both top 10 lightweights and over a two year period, both men have to face the other 8. after the series is done, I'm sure Duran would have been in harder fights for him, but only because that was his style. Whitaker was a slickster and Duran a brawler, so Whitaker is always going to take less punishment and make it look easier than Duran did it.

Here's another example, Joe Frazier. Because of his style he was constantly in hard fights. After beating Muhammad Ali he went to war with D-class fighter Ron Stander. Look at his brawls with Quarry or the Bonavena bouts. he was a class above these guys, yet always had tough fights. Compare him to Ali. Ali fought many of the same opponents yet won rounds more convincingly and took less damage.

I don't disagree with what you're saying. Hamed did seem to have easier victories but I think there is more to it than just talent.

 

You're making an assumption that Pac will be as strong as Hatton at 140. Manny walks around at 145 or so. Hatton at about 185. Manny is naturally the smaller man. Hopkins had nice wins over Oscar and Winky, but we don't use those W's to measure his greatness because they came over fighters who were naturally smaller, yet had been able to move up through their careers through talent and determination. BUT.....they were still at a disadvantage.

I agree Manny looked tremendous against Diaz. On top of that I think he'll do well at lightweight. But at the end of the day, one good fight at lightweight doesn't make you a great lightweight. do you see where Im coming from?

 

hamed struggled quite a few times.

medina - that was a struggle. :yep

ingle - hamed tired late on quite badly and was picked off bigtime in the 10th. :yep

kelley - serious up and downer.

sanchez - struggled against a guy most thought didn't deserve his chance.

 

Because most forum members these days arent capable of remembering further back than the dinner they had yesterday. I mean 15 defences of the WBU, 2 fights against one fighter who was semi-retired and 2 others who were so old they were spitting dust. But hey they were lb for lb ranked opponents!! :roll: Stuff of legends right there. Now you know why anybody these days can get into the HOF.

 

Typo:huh Thats how you spell his name:tong

 

Suarez was a ****ing disgrace. Why on earth that fool ever turned up i dont know. Actually i do. He was a yes man through and through and did **** all for Naz. All he did was bolster his already huge ego by agreeing with him. Hamed never should have split with Wincobank.

 

Throwing insults around because you lack the intelligence to win a proper debate? that's nto like you Scurla!

Yes, they were P4P which is far more significant than anything else.

Hatton fought three great fighters. He got battered once against the greatest fighter of the modrn generation.Bbeat the regning undisputed champion, 140lber great and P4P #3. And in the other, stopped the P4P number 8 for the first time, in the guys only decisive loss.

Hamed fought one great fighter and got schooled.