I have a Masters Degree in Creative Writing. If I use a particular word it's for a particular reason and I'm not looking for advice. Thanks.
I also have a Masters Degree, and I am a fiction writer. If you don't want advice perhaps you shouldn't say things like "Anyone like to share thoughts in my thoughts?" Oh, wait... that was more "advice". Sorry. atsch Anyway, your are welcome for me taking the time to read your work and actually post an intelligent and coherent response. I guess instead I should have just said something stupid about *****s and *******s, slick black fighters and the term "FLOORED". :roll:
Good writing. But you make it sound like Wayne McCullough had gone the distance with Morales before fighting Naz :nono. And to be honest with you Kevin Kelly's best days we're past him when he faced Hamed. The excuse that Hamed was not focused for the Barrera is Bullocks, that was his biggest fight! How was he not going to take that fight serious. If you are going to dedicate a big fight like that to Islam, you are going to came ready. To dedicate a big fight to Islam is serious. Prince Naz was very entertaining to watch. His reflexes we're phenominal, including his power. But I do not see him as an All Time Great, my honest opinion.
Hamed's reflexes get greatly overblown. He was such an exaggerated upper body mover that when he was able to avoid the blows it often looked spectacular, but he was caught just as often, and that exaggerated movement often led to the punches he was hit with looking a lot more damaging then they were. Jabs would send his head flying back.
"Hameds peak came in the two years after capturing his first title. By the time he fought Marco Antonio Barrera in 2001, Hamed was past his best. Hed split with his long-time trainer, earned more than he could spend, and achieved many childhood dreams. Hamed was unmotivated, unfocused and lazy in the build-up to his first fight with a truly elite opponent." Stop reading right there ..What were the odds there for that fight ? Talk about an excuse of epic proportions ..He would have never beat Barrera with his style !
Controversial but I believe it's definitely true Naz was past his best. Barrera's style (and tactics) made it difficult for Hamed to win on points, but Barrera wasn't unstopable and by that time hand injuries had taken their toll and Naz's power wasn't once what it was. '95 Hamed was superior to the Hamed Barrera beat.
Hamed was past his best against Barrera in 2011 but in 2001 he wasn't ,he was also a 3-1 betting favorite ..Blame the loss on his hands all you want ,I blame it on his lousy boxing ..
I'm not blaming the loss on anything. It is what it is. Just saying that '95 Hamed was 'the best' version so '01 was "past best." by a good few years.
Hamed's balance was both a strength and a weakness. It allowed him to invest his entire body in a punch and therefore gave him excellent one-punch power, but it also left him vulnerable to counters from technically proficient boxers with the skills to exploit his hands-down approach. His reflexes were decent, but I tend to agree with your original point. Although I'd lose the "greatly"