Naseem Hamed vs. Manny Pacquiao @ 126

Actually, after Jones's second win over Barrera, Jones and Hamed fought on the same card in 1997, setting up a bout between the two. Jones lost to McKinney, while Hamed knocked out Kelley. A fight with Barrera wasn't on the table, since he'd lost two in a row and was undergoing brain surgery, and Hamed didn't face Gainer because Gainer had been knocked out by Kelley! In order to push McKinney as a legitimate featherweight, he was matched up with Luisito Espinoza for the WBC title first. He lost, unfortunately, while Hamed went after three-division WBA champ, Vasquez.

Luisito Espinoza, however, then lost to Cesar Soto, and Hamed fought Soto because he beat Espinoza. It appears that you have a weak understanding of the era; very few of the top fighters of the era remained undefeated, and Hamed beat everyone at the top of the division, or someone who'd beaten him. In the end, Norwood and Marquez came up, but by 1999, Hamed was a little past it as a top fighter.

 

I love the excuse makers.

"He was past it by the time he fought real competition."

::

 

Most featherweights are past their prime by the time they're in their mid- to late-20s, although I think that Hamed's poor performances in this era had more to do with his lackluster training methods and ditching his longtime trainer, much like Tyson against Douglas. Arguably, he should have been in his prime then.

 

Stop back tracking you brain damaged idiot. I would respect you more if you just accepted you were an idiot instead of being a damn back tracking pussy. :shit:

 

Huh? Although I said that Hamed wasn't at his best, I admitted that it was partially his fault. Can't you read, dumbass?

 

I was actually referring to the times around '96-'97 when Hamed should've been facing guys like Barerra, Jones, McKinney, Espinosa....all of those guys were options at that time.
Warren instead kept his boy away and fought the scrubs....he even relinquished the IBF belt rather than fight Hector Lizzaragga, begged the WBO not to allow JM-Marquez as the mandatory and also managed to avoid Istvan Kovaks somehow.


Poor, poor, poor.

 

I think Naz KO's the pac man

 

:clap:

Where have you been LOK? :dunno:

 

Unfortunately, it's not that simple. Barrera wasn't a factor because of his losses to Jones. Jones got a posh #6 ranking, pound-for-pound by Ring magazine, but he lost his next fight. McKinney wasn't a factor until he beat Jones. Espinoza, I'll give you. At the time, NO ONE was complaining about Barrera's opposition. He was consistently considered the most fighting champion in boxing.

Oh, and I can tell you a few stories about McKinney-Morales, if you want.

 

Can you tell us a few stories about The Big Show and Hulk Hogan Zac? ::

 

When I kept asking him why Kid Chocolate deserved such a high ranking, he usually came off with posts like this:

 

So you basically don't know anything about Hulk Hogan and The Big Show?:dunno:

That's what I thought.opcorn:

 

$400,000. That's how much Hogan paid Andre for the win at Wrestlemania III. Cancer. The Big Show has it.

I know about a lot of shit. Wrestling's something I know about.

 

Are you sure wrestling is just something you know about in passing fancy Zac, or does a deeper love lie beneath? ::

 

I have this incredible joshi match on my hard drive where four chicks go at it shoot-style, and then two guys come out and fuck them.

 

That's nice Zachary. :clap:

 

I half expected you to doo a Google search and pretend that one of the chicks in the video is your girlfriend or something. How is anyone supposed to believe anything you say after the way you've been exposed recently?

 

Exposed? That term should never leave your mouth or be typed by your fingers Zachary. ::

 

You spent days talking about how Semen Tommy Watson was a fighter so worthy that merely beating him qualifies one as being among the top five featherweights of all time.

 

Do you enjoy stalking other men Zachary? I feel a bit flattered. You love me. opcorn: