Re: IF MORRALES fought Hamed before Barrera would it be the same?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonesJrMayweather
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO
I think Naz would have stopped Morales without to much trouble i remember watching Injin Chi giving him some trouble and shuck him a few times and i think a better prepared Naz would have beaten Barrera
Giving him bit a trouble and giving him load of trouble is totally different Naz had trouble alot of trouble with Kelley Medina ect Morales would of beat Naz his style was even better suited to beat Naz than it was for Barrera.
No way would Morales be able to take Naz's power
He wouldn't have to because he would box on outside like Barrera and outbox Naz.
but don't forget naz was a lefty...but had power in both hands and you saw what pac did to morrales and after seeing the second and third fights...i think pacman had a good argue ment that morrales only won the first because of the gloves...because when wore his punchers glove he stopped morrales twice...
anyway prince's lefty style mayhave posed a prob for EM
Morales vs Pac is totally different Pac moves side to side comes right at you Naz holds his hands down and waits for openings Pac doesn't Naz has been shook so many times in his career and i hate to say it but he never really fought top level opponent mostly domestic fighters hell even Ingle almost had Naz in 10th round of there fight.
Re: IF MORRALES fought Hamed before Barrera would it be the same?
come on.. naz looked good against guys who just wasnt elite, his trainer said he didnt want marquez, and instead went for barrera..
i really think that those hyping up naz, saying, well morales this and morales that, should take a deep breath.. cause this is simply ,a bad excuse, as bad as it gets..
morales, barrera and marquez are as bad as they come in boxing, skills, chin and heart, all of them warriors and able to take punches,, that is simply not up for discussion.. ..
if naz was such a great fighter, then he would have adapted to barrera style, and tried to do something, but he just wasnt skilled enough to do so..
honestly the 3 mentioned was just a class above naz..
naz simply just didnt cut against the elite, morales, barrera and marquez would all beat a prime naz..
Re: IF MORRALES fought Hamed before Barrera would it be the same?
that's right he didn't i forgot about that..but then he did retire after that or soon after..if he really felt the gloves made a difference he would have kept fighting and demanded a rematch after a few wins to prove it was the gloves..i.e. PACMAN v MOrrales...
Re: IF MORRALES fought Hamed before Barrera would it be the same?
Quote:
Originally Posted by greatdane
come on.. naz looked good against guys who just wasnt elite, his trainer said he didnt want marquez, and instead went for barrera..
i really think that those hyping up naz, saying, well morales this and morales that, should take a deep breath.. cause this is simply ,a bad excuse, as bad as it gets..
morales, barrera and marquez are as bad as they come in boxing, skills, chin and heart, all of them warriors and able to take punches,, that is simply not up for discussion.. ..
if naz was such a great fighter, then he would have adapted to barrera style, and tried to do something, but he just wasnt skilled enough to do so..
honestly the 3 mentioned was just a class above naz..
naz simply just didnt cut against the elite morales, barrera and marquez would all beat a prime naz..
so then naz is like delahoya... ;D ;)
