Pac V Naz at Featherweight.

He is only proven as fasr as his level of opposition goes. But who did he KO? That is the difference.

Pac has been hurt by less hurtful punches than Naz dished out but same can be said with Hamed.

The view on Hamed's power would have been placed into broader perspective had he faced guys like Morales and JMM, both have no less than iron chins.

 

first of all, styles only make fights to a certain point. Ability also comes into play, and PAc simply has more.

Secondly, Nas is tailor made for Pac as well. He uses head movement to avoid punches, but Pacquiao is a southpaw who jabs alot and also throws lightning fast combinations. Also PAcquiao has showed time and again that he would be able to recover from one big Hamed blow, which is something lesser fighters than Pacquiao have done at featherweight.

Also you said Pacquiao has been KO'd by lesser punchers than Hamed but that is irrelevant we are talking at featherweight. Pac's last loss by KO was 9 years before he moved up to featherweight.

Seems to me you're bringing up baseless arguments.

 

Because pac is simply better in every aspect of the game... One punch KO probably goes to naz but everything besides that i'd favor pac.

 

please stop this thread. this was settled already...

This content is protected

 

just cause a topic has been already done once before doesn't mean people can no longer talk about it

 

i don't want to interrupt free speech but the argument for both sides are getting old already.

hamed boys: "pac is tailor-made for naz."
pac fans: "pac is a greater fighter and hamed was exposed when he fought one in barrera."

were are running around in circles here.

 

Lewis TKO 6. :yep

 

If Naz had caught Barrera, he would not have gotten up. Do not confuse his inability to land the KO punch with a lack of actually having it.

 

Your post has nothing to do with who had more power. Hamed hit harder. It's really that simple.

I picked Pacquiao to win this matchup, but it won't be because of power. Corrales had more power than Mayweather....does Mayweather beating him somehow change that?

 

It has nothing to do with it at all. I saw Pacquiao at that weight. He had more speed than Naz. He didn't have more power. Naz was extremely heavy handed. Speed gives more power to a point, but it certainly isn't a rule. Roy Jones had more speed than anyone at MW and SMW. He is not however, the hardest puncher in that weight class' history.

Why do you assume that I didn't see Pacquiao there. Many here did, and carry the opinion that Hamed hit harder. Hamed is probably the hardest punching FW ever. If Pacquiao brawled with him, he would have had a far more difficult time.

 

It's not a blanket statement. There is more to power than that. Pacquaio has more speed, but there is nothing that says he has more momentum or leverage than Hamed. So please, please don't make a blanket statment because you like Pacquiao. Hamed like Pacquiao, KO'd nearly everyone he fought. Hamed often threw punches from awkward angles and lunged forward, causing his oft mentioned balance problem.

Don't try to qualify my knowledge with what you THINK I know. I have seen quite a few Pacquiao fights. I am one of the only people here who have mentioned his prime was at 122 (126 he was not as good as 122). I know plenty about Pacquiao, and saw plenty of Hamed, whom I hated.

 

Pacquiao never fought anyone at featherweight with Hamed's power. Morales could hit with the best of them, but super-bantamweight was where his chilling power was at its most lethal. He could hit very well after moving up to featherweight, but not quite in Hamed's league.

The Hamed who fought under Emanuel Steward would have the least chance against Pacquiao. Why?. His hands down style never combined well with the flat-footedness he developed under Steward. Upperbody flexibility wasn't what it was previously. The very average Augie Sanchez had Hamed down and in trouble, and we all know how throughly outboxed he was when sharing a ring with Barrera. Pacquiao's relentless aggression would have Hamed on the canvas, and probably knocked out in the end.

Hamed in his prime is a different matter. Around 96-98. He used the jab with more regularity, as Badillo found out when he was outclassed and eventually stopped. Not a ramrod by any means, but a damn fine point scorer which beffudled opponents. Hamed's style was more elasticated around this time. Very unpredictable in terms of where punches were coming from. Fighters were more hesitant to committ themselves as they were not just concered about his power, but rather unsure of what he was going to do next.

Two word sums up Hamed better than the top paragraph to the one below: Predictable and unpredictable.

 

Hamed is far more unorthodox than Pacquiao. My point with him being off balance was that he often lunged, much like Pacquiao, creating great momentum. And Hamed had 36 wins with 31 KO's. It was the WAY he stopped fighters that was impressive.

We will not agree on this however, so it's best to move on.