Prince Naseem Hamed!!!

He became more powerful (which wasn`t necessary IMO) in his later reign at FW but his reflexes & speed badly declined... his SBW & early FW days (vs Robinson etc) he was at his best, whether it would have been good enough to better the Barrera of 2001 I don`t know, I`m sure he would have given a better account of himself regardless though.

 

I'd say even before the S.Robinson fight (excellent performance) Hamed already started to show small signs of technical decline.

Somewhere between Liendo and Perez fights, I think.

Less movement, more emphasize on pure punching power.

He was already a well-known, well-paid celebrity in Britain going into fight with Robinson, wasn't he?

 

Well put!!!Obrigado.

 

I think Hamed got very far for all his shortcomings. He really did have thunder in his fists but his overall boxing skills were very poor. Dont really know much further he could have gone, it seems he became less effective when they tried to teach him basic skills.
His defense and footwork were just flat out horrible. He committed to shots so much he fell all over the ring, but he had some natural skills that probably could have been honed more to compete with the likes of Barrera and Morales etc. but it would have had to been developed from the start.

 

Yep he came across an all time great who wouldnt be intimidated and was hungry.A big fish in a big pond of small Mexican fighters who lacked for nothing in skills and heart.Having said that,Hamed had a great run and was exciting while it lasted.Got to give him that.

 

Hamed's punching style would only work with the awkward angled the Wincobank style gave him.

That same style would always have fighters tough and smart enough to exploit it.

McGrain put it right; he reached his potential. A genuine unified World champion, politics aside, with some quality scalps.

 

Hamed could have been a great fighter with his natural power and athleticism, if only he had learned a relatively proper style and been more of a "fighting man".

Doesn't need to be overly textbook by any means, just not the incompetent mess it actually was.

Taken for what he was in reality though.A talented pure puncher with dedication issues and a weak will to win, he got about as he could have.

Give hamed a saddler'esque heart and will to win, or that of many of the greatest pure punching fighters and i think he beats Barrera, who was hardly a master boxer-puncher when fighting in the mood he used against Hamed.people don't mention enough how timid and weak mentally Hamed was in that fight.

Imagine him marching relentlessly forward, winging bomb after bomb full of angry marciano italian-americaness.Pity he was miles away from ever being like that.

 

I think his power came from his unorthodoxy, though the thickness of his legs at feather means he'd be a hurtful puncher regardless, it was how he caught his man that did them in.

Even if he was a straight forward Arguello type I think his sparking opportunities would lessen. Leaping off the floor to twat someone is why he was so effective, and all the negative points you've brought up had to come as a package.

Even assuming he hits just as hard swinging for the fences in a Moon-esque fashion he'd achieve less than he actually did IMO.

 

Spot on. The Ingle's were the problem.

 

He wasn't the same without Ingle because he had two different trainers taking turns in the corner, sometimes depending on how the fight was going, and they weren't working together either, lost the few people who had some small authority over him having trained him since he was a nipper, and, as I've said, stopped using all the hallmarks of his style which enabled him to dish out the abuse he did at his very best.

Manny Steward is so much of a better trainer than the Ingles it's unreal but Naz would've only been successful with the style he had. No surprise that his performances went downhill when he toned down his unique approach.

 

Naz trying to box textbook & neglect his awkwardness was the beginning of the end.

 

Agree 100%, he didn't even try anyway, just did **** all under Steward and Suarez.

Shambolic.

 

He never had any technical ability,had a zero boxing IQ and was more concerned with putting on a show than proving his "greatness",lol.Easily the most overrated fighter on these boards(just read the General when his name comes up),it's laughable how many excuses are(still)made for him.This,combined with his most obnoxious personality,makes him a very dislikable individual indeed.His unorthodoxy,combined with his flashy reflexes and impressive power,were quite impressive against decent,but limited opposition.MAB,not the greatest feather ever,(or even the 3rd best of the past 35 or so years) exposed him and clowned him.If anyone believes he EVER had any chance to be an ATG feather,more
power to them,lol.

 

I think with hindsight he does not get the credit he deserves.

I hated him when he fought. I fell for the gimmick. But he was more than the gimmick. I think it is sometimes forgotten how big he was at his peak. At the time, outside the come backing Tyson, his heavyweight chums and Oscar, he was as big as anyone in the boxing universe.

His fight with Kelley was a classic, and his power was awesome. For the grief sometimes thrown at him about his opposition, his resume was still pretty solid. Tom Johnson, years into an unbeaten run, ditto Bungu. A Vazquez who came into the fight the 'linear' 126lbs champ. Wayne McCullough still had fight in him, Kelley was still a big name, Robinson, Soto and Medina were tough very good fighters, and Ingle, an unbeaten pup.

Yes Barrera beat him comfortable, but I still would of loved to of seen that fight happen in the mid/late 90s, and but for Poison, it probably would of happened. Naseem did not fight the big names he could of, but that was not always his and/or his management's fault.

 

Clinton; you're being way too harsh IMO.