Its like comparing apples and oranges, Hamed was a slugger and Khan is a high workrate boxer/combination puncher there styles are completely different, The only thing that these two have in common is that they are Muslims of ****stan ancestory, Not just that but Khan is very relaxed about his religion you never hear him say things like "Allah willed me to win this fight", "Whatever Allah decides". The most you would ever hear Khan talk about his religion is the basic "I want to thank god" which I think 99% of boxers say. Ive noticed that fans and the media in particular always try to draw parallels, When Khan fought Malignaggi he was trying "to do what Hamed did when he beat Kevin Kelley by breaking into the American market", When Khan gets a hair cut fans get "flashbacks" of Hamed getting his haircuts, Some people even think Khan is cocky like Hamed but he is not, Hamed was cocky, Khan seems more down to earth. Not just that but Hamed lost to Barrera and retired to never fight again, Khan had already lost a fight early in his career and effectively retired Barrera.
I'm not sure i've ever seen Khan compared to Naz. Apart from in terms of being an arrogant ***** who is surrounded by yes man and is waiting for a seriously embarrassing fall.
would honestly say khan is more of a slugger than hammed. its becasue of the hype and excitment behind them in the early parts of there careers and at young ages.
He is quite often. Other than being asians they have little in common in terms of boxing style or personality.
I've got to be honest, I don't think I've ever heard that comparison. Maybe you're thinking of Kell Brook.
who's making all these khan threads without lazarus permission,or,are they all laz,just in a different form of disguise:think seems to be a lot,and no laz about:think,and i really don't beleive it,there is no khan thread without laz,its like a fit prostitute without a bin full of used condoms,they just don't go togeather:tired