That's what I'm saying. When has Naz cracked a prime star fighter and made them feel his power? Naz never showed he had the ability to place power at the elite level. I can't believe that people still overrate this circus monkey years after MAB exposed him for what he was; a wild swinging, devoid of technique, fraud who quit the sport when he was exposed. This guy must be the most overrated fighter on this board since Ducktonio Fagarita. Maybe Fagarita can fly into the ring on a flying carpet like Haveeb and people will be comparing his power to Ray Robinson someday. :: I guess knocking out old former champs, no hopers, and burnt out jr. featherweights holds a lot of weight with the fightbeat crowd. :shit:
True, I meant the shitty and overrated part and the fraud part. They both quit when they lost like champions though.
Well, you say Hamed is a fraud when he stepped up and lost and quit. Tito got a gift over DLH in a fight overwhelming believed Tito lost. Hopkins fought him, Tito was outclassed, he tuneup with a bum and then quit like a cunt. He returned beat a limited guy and the stepped up and quit like a cunt again. In that sense, he is twice the quiiter Hamed is.Tito was so humiliated he had to quit twice.
It's not uncommon for featherweights to be past it at age 27. Anyone REMOTELY versed in the history of boxing would know that. Yes, as I stated above, we are in an era where there are a few featherweights that have fought on well into their late 20s and early 30s, but that is not always the norm. Think about it, bonehead.
Just because it's not uncommon doesn't mean it's a standard to live by. Why are you acting so dumb lately? Even for you I'm kind of shocked.
You can't complain about Hamed being past his prime at age 27, since most smaller fighters are past their prime at that age.
I'm not complaining about anything except Haveeb's competition. He never beat one elite fighter in his entire career. I'd be surprised if in 50 years Haveeb is seen as little more than a side show spectacle for this era. He was entertaining for sure (not so much later in his career), but the most glaring weakness he has against his resume is the marquee name.
His resume and his ability are two different things though. In a prime vs prime mythical match up only one is relevant.
your like a broken record, mate. The answer : 'nobody great', but the thread aint who's greater or who has a better resume, is it?
EXACTLY. So how does a guy who has no history of beating anyone great before (actually he only has a history of getting his ass kicked by someone great) suddenly become great enough to do it? :dunno: This thread is retarded. ::
cause new stuff happens, thats how 'history' works, chief. the fact is we'll never know one way or another because Naz wasted his prime years fighting B level opponents, end of story. But just reflexivly judging him in mythical match ups based on the Barrera fight, where he had clearly slid, is just fucking dumb...its like judging Tyson on the Holyfield fight or Holmes on the Tyson fight or Louis on the Wallcot fight or Jones on the Tarver fight etc, etc. makes no sense.
He "slid" because he was in against someone who wasn't burnt out or a WBOgus mandatory. The Hamed that got his ass kicked by MAB would still beat burnt out Tom Johnson and Vuyani Bungu, just not Pacquiao.
in your oppinion. I think the tapes show otherwise. For the record I would pick Pacquiao over Hamed anyway, so the point is moot.:tease:
Don't take Alabama Man seriously. He thinks that Bobby Watson's one of the best featherweights of all time, probably because his nickname sounds like "semen," which is Alabama Man's favorite drink.
One coming out of my dick, one coming out of my stomach, one coming out of my nose. That doesn't hide the fact that you know NOTHING about his history of the 126-pound division.
He was ranked in #1 by Ring magazine at featherweight following his win over LaBarba, who was much worse off than anyone suspected. In the 18 months he was a ranked contender, he lost three times, and then disappeared off the radar. His ranking, as seen through the eyes of history, was a mistake, as the only fighter of note he beat had recently lost an eye, and was two weeks away from retirement. No one knew that at the time, however. LaBarba's eye was gone before his second fight with Kid Chocolate, but it wasn't removed until shortly after he retired.
Pac by mid-to-late round stoppage. Tall southpaw, too rangy and too much power. One of the things I noticed about Hamed during the Warren years (1994-98) was that he was purposely kept away from guys like Barerra, Gainer, Kelley, Jones, etc - hell he didnt even get a fight against Espinosa! All we got was a succession of bums: Robinson (utter joke), Alicea (who dropped him), Hardy (minus Laurel) Then we got the 'star'-names: Kelley (on-the-slide), Vazquez (aged 40?), McCullough (1st of the super-bantamweights moving up), Soto (WTF was that all about?), Bungu (a terrified super-bantamweight, no less). The we got Marco Antonio Barrera, 'a tough, walk-forward Mexican' (as Warren described him) who had boxed his way to maybe 4 or 5 decisions so far in his career....simply staying on the outwside and jabbing/counter-punching the toothless-freak. Plain and simple - the disgusting Hamed Brothers figured Barrera was a shot-fighter following the Morales war. :doh: :nono: ::