-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Marquez was offered a career high payday of $400,000 to face Naz in the year 2000. He turned it down claiming he wasn't ready for Naz, even though he spent two years as WBO no.1 mandatory. Naz ruined the unfortunate Augie Sanchez instead.
The question is - where would Marquez be without this duck of Naz? It was clearly a great move. Fact.
Discuss
That right there says it all. Marquez waited and waited for Hamed to fight him. While Hamed begged and begged the WBO to let him fight some one else. After giving him so many passes the WBO was considering stripping him of the title. But Hamed promised he would fight Marquez after he fought Cesar Soto. He wanted to unify the titles first. Hamed beat Soto in one of the worst fights of 1999. Marquez canceled his fight with Roque Cassiani to prepare for Hamed. Than in one of the most skanless, cowardice moves ever in Boxing history Hamed backs out of the fight and in turn faces Vuyani Bungu. Now Bungu was a fine Super Bantamweight. But he had never fought as a Featherweight before. Not to mention he hadn't fought in over a year. Yet some how Hamed deemed him worthy of a title shot. Marquez considered legal action but decided against it. He was done with Hamed and his games. Hamed creamed Bungu while Marquez went on with the Cassiani fight. Afterwards Hamed for like the 10th time again told Marquez he would fight him. Marquez said if he was serious about fighting him give him $500,000. Hamed showed he wasn't serious and said no.
90% of your post is utter drivel.
This little snippet comes from Antonio Curtis, Marquez former matchmaker at Forum Boxing - "When the WBO said they were going to make a unification, I forgot who the hell they were supposed to be fighting. What happened is this, as soon as they told us no, we took another fight. As soon as we took another fight, then they called us when we had already signed for another fight and
then they wanted us to fight Hamed, Curtis recalled, of those events. Now, I wanted to pull that fight, to fight Hamed. But Nacho said no. He would've gotten a half-million for the fight and Nacho turned that fight down." http://www.maxboxing.com/kim/kim031607.asp
There you go. Marquez shamelessly ducked Naz. Fact.
A link that leads no where. Just like your post. And I here i though you would actually provide something of substance. I'm disappointed in myself for thinking that. Anyway this is pretty easy standard stuff. The champion must defend against his mandatory within 6 months to a year. Hamed went over 2 years avoiding Marquez. In the mean time he fought an ancient fighter (Wilfredo Vazquez) a seriously out classed fighter (Wayne McCullough) and domestic club fighter (Paul Ingle). That's what you call ducking 101 there
All three much bigger names than Marquez back then. Anyway, i've something even better, straight from the horses mouth Juan Manuel Marquez admitting his duckage of the Naz fella.
Read and weep boy -
Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed
Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared. They did not give me sufficient time to get prepared."
"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. It is almost the same way with fighting (Freddie) Norwood. You have to knock him out to get the victory."
Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."
Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, criticized the Hamed camp's negotiating tactics. "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "They are only playing with our heads. We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."
LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...
There you go, you can't argue with the facts, Marquez turned down a career high payday because he didn't feel ready for Naz.
Marquez bottled the Naz fight. Fact.
Thank you. 2 years he waited and waited. But Hamed wanted none. You said it yourself. Can't argue facts. You provided the proof. For 2 years Hamed ducked him. He had no problem fighting chumps like Ingle. A fighter who'd own mother didn't know she had a son named Paul. But looked for every excuse not to fight Marquez
It's like this. Hamed was a good entertaining fighter. Fun to watch. But an ATG he is more certainly not. Facts don’t lie. And facts are Hamed never beat a real good fighter who was in his prime. All the fighters he fought who were a name came in with ridiculous amount of mileage on them. When Hamed fought Barrera. Barrera had already fought 55 times. Cesar Soto 63. Wilfredo Vazquez 59. Kevin Kelley 50. Vuyani Bungu 39. Tom Johnson 48. Manuel Medina 59. The ones that didn’t Paul Ingle and Wayne McCullough were not as good as the previous fighters mentioned. McCullough was average. Ingle was straight garbage.
The two year wait just harms Marquez case for the duck. If he spent that long chasing Naz how come he said NO the first opportunity he got? Don't make sense. The truth is Marquez/Beristain never wanted any part of Naz.
Here's a little quiz for you.
What do these guys have in common - Coto, Johnson, Medina, Kelly, McCullough, Bungu and Vazquez? That's right, they had all won "world" titles before Naz bashed them. Even Paul Ingle won the IBF title in his very next fight after losing to Naz.
Marquez had how many world titles back in Naz day? That's right, ZERO!! Marquez didn't become a "world" champion until bascially TWO years AFTER Naz had retired.
Just like Marquez the man himself said - "I want to fight Naz when I have a world title to make it more fair"
Marquez simply wasn't ready for Naz back then. And Naz had bigger fish to fry unifying the featherweight divison.
The duck explained. Fact.
What big fish? Cesar Soto? Come on now. Hamed didn't care about unifiying. But trying to unify was the only excuse he had left that the WBO was going to buy. They were set to strip him for his shameful ducking of Marquez. That's a fact. Hamed backed himself into a unification bout when he used it as an excuse. Why you think he never went after the other 2 titles?
As usual you display an astounding lack of knowledge of the boxing business.
Now get prepared to be educated some more. Ready?
1. Why would the WBO want a chump change fighter as their champion when they have a millionaire megastar reigning? The bigger the fighter, the bigger the purses, the bigger the SANCTION FEES. Why do you think the WBO didn't give a fuck about Marquez languishing as the no.1 contender? Marquez was a nobody.
2. The WBO never stripped Naz of anything, he chucked the title to fight Barrera.
3. Tom Johnson - IBF champion
Wilfredo Vazquez - Lineal and WBA champion (stripped for unifying with Naz)
Cesar Soto - WBC champion
Now let me make this easy - whilst Naz held the WBO title he beat the current lineal, WBC, WBA and IBF champion. That makes him the lineal, unified king of the featherweight division.
So what two titles you on about? :vd:
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Marquez was offered a career high payday of $400,000 to face Naz in the year 2000. He turned it down claiming he wasn't ready for Naz, even though he spent two years as WBO no.1 mandatory. Naz ruined the unfortunate Augie Sanchez instead.
The question is - where would Marquez be without this duck of Naz? It was clearly a great move. Fact.
Discuss
That right there says it all. Marquez waited and waited for Hamed to fight him. While Hamed begged and begged the WBO to let him fight some one else. After giving him so many passes the WBO was considering stripping him of the title. But Hamed promised he would fight Marquez after he fought Cesar Soto. He wanted to unify the titles first. Hamed beat Soto in one of the worst fights of 1999. Marquez canceled his fight with Roque Cassiani to prepare for Hamed. Than in one of the most skanless, cowardice moves ever in Boxing history Hamed backs out of the fight and in turn faces Vuyani Bungu. Now Bungu was a fine Super Bantamweight. But he had never fought as a Featherweight before. Not to mention he hadn't fought in over a year. Yet some how Hamed deemed him worthy of a title shot. Marquez considered legal action but decided against it. He was done with Hamed and his games. Hamed creamed Bungu while Marquez went on with the Cassiani fight. Afterwards Hamed for like the 10th time again told Marquez he would fight him. Marquez said if he was serious about fighting him give him $500,000. Hamed showed he wasn't serious and said no.
90% of your post is utter drivel.
This little snippet comes from Antonio Curtis, Marquez former matchmaker at Forum Boxing - "When the WBO said they were going to make a unification, I forgot who the hell they were supposed to be fighting. What happened is this, as soon as they told us no, we took another fight. As soon as we took another fight, then they called us when we had already signed for another fight and
then they wanted us to fight Hamed, Curtis recalled, of those events. Now, I wanted to pull that fight, to fight Hamed. But Nacho said no. He would've gotten a half-million for the fight and Nacho turned that fight down." http://www.maxboxing.com/kim/kim031607.asp
There you go. Marquez shamelessly ducked Naz. Fact.
A link that leads no where. Just like your post. And I here i though you would actually provide something of substance. I'm disappointed in myself for thinking that. Anyway this is pretty easy standard stuff. The champion must defend against his mandatory within 6 months to a year. Hamed went over 2 years avoiding Marquez. In the mean time he fought an ancient fighter (Wilfredo Vazquez) a seriously out classed fighter (Wayne McCullough) and domestic club fighter (Paul Ingle). That's what you call ducking 101 there
All three much bigger names than Marquez back then. Anyway, i've something even better, straight from the horses mouth Juan Manuel Marquez admitting his duckage of the Naz fella.
Read and weep boy -
Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed
Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared. They did not give me sufficient time to get prepared."
"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. It is almost the same way with fighting (Freddie) Norwood. You have to knock him out to get the victory."
Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."
Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, criticized the Hamed camp's negotiating tactics. "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "They are only playing with our heads. We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."
LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...
There you go, you can't argue with the facts, Marquez turned down a career high payday because he didn't feel ready for Naz.
Marquez bottled the Naz fight. Fact.
Thank you. 2 years he waited and waited. But Hamed wanted none. You said it yourself. Can't argue facts. You provided the proof. For 2 years Hamed ducked him. He had no problem fighting chumps like Ingle. A fighter who'd own mother didn't know she had a son named Paul. But looked for every excuse not to fight Marquez
It's like this. Hamed was a good entertaining fighter. Fun to watch. But an ATG he is more certainly not. Facts don’t lie. And facts are Hamed never beat a real good fighter who was in his prime. All the fighters he fought who were a name came in with ridiculous amount of mileage on them. When Hamed fought Barrera. Barrera had already fought 55 times. Cesar Soto 63. Wilfredo Vazquez 59. Kevin Kelley 50. Vuyani Bungu 39. Tom Johnson 48. Manuel Medina 59. The ones that didn’t Paul Ingle and Wayne McCullough were not as good as the previous fighters mentioned. McCullough was average. Ingle was straight garbage.
The two year wait just harms Marquez case for the duck. If he spent that long chasing Naz how come he said NO the first opportunity he got? Don't make sense. The truth is Marquez/Beristain never wanted any part of Naz.
Here's a little quiz for you.
What do these guys have in common - Coto, Johnson, Medina, Kelly, McCullough, Bungu and Vazquez? That's right, they had all won "world" titles before Naz bashed them. Even Paul Ingle won the IBF title in his very next fight after losing to Naz.
Marquez had how many world titles back in Naz day? That's right, ZERO!! Marquez didn't become a "world" champion until bascially TWO years AFTER Naz had retired.
Just like Marquez the man himself said - "I want to fight Naz when I have a world title to make it more fair"
Marquez simply wasn't ready for Naz back then. And Naz had bigger fish to fry unifying the featherweight divison.
The duck explained. Fact.
What big fish? Cesar Soto? Come on now. Hamed didn't care about unifiying. But trying to unify was the only excuse he had left that the WBO was going to buy. They were set to strip him for his shameful ducking of Marquez. That's a fact. Hamed backed himself into a unification bout when he used it as an excuse. Why you think he never went after the other 2 titles?
As usual you display an astounding lack of knowledge of the boxing business.
Now get prepared to be educated some more. Ready?
1. Why would the WBO want a chump change fighter as their champion when they have a millionaire megastar reigning? The bigger the fighter, the bigger the purses, the bigger the SANCTION FEES. Why do you think the WBO didn't give a fuck about Marquez languishing as the no.1 contender? Marquez was a nobody.
2. The WBO never stripped Naz of anything, he chucked the title to fight Barrera.
3. Tom Johnson - IBF champion
Wilfredo Vazquez - Lineal and WBA champion (stripped for unifying with Naz)
Cesar Soto - WBC champion
Now let me make this easy - whilst Naz held the WBO title he beat the current lineal, WBC, WBA and IBF champion. That makes him the
lineal, unified king of the featherweight division.
So what two titles you on about? :vd:
It's obvious you copied and paste somebody else post from where ever the hell you read it from and are trying to pass it off as your own. While you got the right words in. And the key phrases. You ain't using them right. Cuz you don't really know what you talking about. Let me fix your inconsistencies with straight facts.
Hamed became the lineal Featherweight champion when he beat Wilfredo Vazquez. Cuz that's how the lineal tree goes. So there was never no need to fight Cesar Soto. Unless it was to duck Marquez. He didn't care about his belt or unifying. If he did he would of never gave up the IBF title. And would of made sure Vazquez some how would of kept his WBA title. Or at least gone after who ever had the WBA title at the time. That's what unifying means. Collecting all belts. It wasn't to be considered the man at featherweight. Cuz he got that distinction when he beat Vazquez. Learn the difference. Fighting Soto was for one reason. And one reason only. To avoid fighting Marquez. Facts don't lie. Hamed ducked Marquez. Ducking was his nature. I'll prove it. Name me an elite fighter Hamed beat that was in his prime. Just one. And I said elite. So save your Paul Ingle and Wayne McCullough. Neither was ever elite.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Marquez was offered a career high payday of $400,000 to face Naz in the year 2000. He turned it down claiming he wasn't ready for Naz, even though he spent two years as WBO no.1 mandatory. Naz ruined the unfortunate Augie Sanchez instead.
The question is - where would Marquez be without this duck of Naz? It was clearly a great move. Fact.
Discuss
That right there says it all. Marquez waited and waited for Hamed to fight him. While Hamed begged and begged the WBO to let him fight some one else. After giving him so many passes the WBO was considering stripping him of the title. But Hamed promised he would fight Marquez after he fought Cesar Soto. He wanted to unify the titles first. Hamed beat Soto in one of the worst fights of 1999. Marquez canceled his fight with Roque Cassiani to prepare for Hamed. Than in one of the most skanless, cowardice moves ever in Boxing history Hamed backs out of the fight and in turn faces Vuyani Bungu. Now Bungu was a fine Super Bantamweight. But he had never fought as a Featherweight before. Not to mention he hadn't fought in over a year. Yet some how Hamed deemed him worthy of a title shot. Marquez considered legal action but decided against it. He was done with Hamed and his games. Hamed creamed Bungu while Marquez went on with the Cassiani fight. Afterwards Hamed for like the 10th time again told Marquez he would fight him. Marquez said if he was serious about fighting him give him $500,000. Hamed showed he wasn't serious and said no.
90% of your post is utter drivel.
This little snippet comes from Antonio Curtis, Marquez former matchmaker at Forum Boxing - "When the WBO said they were going to make a unification, I forgot who the hell they were supposed to be fighting. What happened is this, as soon as they told us no, we took another fight. As soon as we took another fight, then they called us when we had already signed for another fight and
then they wanted us to fight Hamed, Curtis recalled, of those events. Now, I wanted to pull that fight, to fight Hamed. But Nacho said no. He would've gotten a half-million for the fight and Nacho turned that fight down." http://www.maxboxing.com/kim/kim031607.asp
There you go. Marquez shamelessly ducked Naz. Fact.
A link that leads no where. Just like your post. And I here i though you would actually provide something of substance. I'm disappointed in myself for thinking that. Anyway this is pretty easy standard stuff. The champion must defend against his mandatory within 6 months to a year. Hamed went over 2 years avoiding Marquez. In the mean time he fought an ancient fighter (Wilfredo Vazquez) a seriously out classed fighter (Wayne McCullough) and domestic club fighter (Paul Ingle). That's what you call ducking 101 there
All three much bigger names than Marquez back then. Anyway, i've something even better, straight from the horses mouth Juan Manuel Marquez admitting his duckage of the Naz fella.
Read and weep boy -
Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed
Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared. They did not give me sufficient time to get prepared."
"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. It is almost the same way with fighting (Freddie) Norwood. You have to knock him out to get the victory."
Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."
Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, criticized the Hamed camp's negotiating tactics. "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "They are only playing with our heads. We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."
LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...
There you go, you can't argue with the facts, Marquez turned down a career high payday because he didn't feel ready for Naz.
Marquez bottled the Naz fight. Fact.
Thank you. 2 years he waited and waited. But Hamed wanted none. You said it yourself. Can't argue facts. You provided the proof. For 2 years Hamed ducked him. He had no problem fighting chumps like Ingle. A fighter who'd own mother didn't know she had a son named Paul. But looked for every excuse not to fight Marquez
It's like this. Hamed was a good entertaining fighter. Fun to watch. But an ATG he is more certainly not. Facts don’t lie. And facts are Hamed never beat a real good fighter who was in his prime. All the fighters he fought who were a name came in with ridiculous amount of mileage on them. When Hamed fought Barrera. Barrera had already fought 55 times. Cesar Soto 63. Wilfredo Vazquez 59. Kevin Kelley 50. Vuyani Bungu 39. Tom Johnson 48. Manuel Medina 59. The ones that didn’t Paul Ingle and Wayne McCullough were not as good as the previous fighters mentioned. McCullough was average. Ingle was straight garbage.
The two year wait just harms Marquez case for the duck. If he spent that long chasing Naz how come he said NO the first opportunity he got? Don't make sense. The truth is Marquez/Beristain never wanted any part of Naz.
Here's a little quiz for you.
What do these guys have in common - Coto, Johnson, Medina, Kelly, McCullough, Bungu and Vazquez? That's right, they had all won "world" titles before Naz bashed them. Even Paul Ingle won the IBF title in his very next fight after losing to Naz.
Marquez had how many world titles back in Naz day? That's right, ZERO!! Marquez didn't become a "world" champion until bascially TWO years AFTER Naz had retired.
Just like Marquez the man himself said - "I want to fight Naz when I have a world title to make it more fair"
Marquez simply wasn't ready for Naz back then. And Naz had bigger fish to fry unifying the featherweight divison.
The duck explained. Fact.
What big fish? Cesar Soto? Come on now. Hamed didn't care about unifiying. But trying to unify was the only excuse he had left that the WBO was going to buy. They were set to strip him for his shameful ducking of Marquez. That's a fact. Hamed backed himself into a unification bout when he used it as an excuse. Why you think he never went after the other 2 titles?
As usual you display an astounding lack of knowledge of the boxing business.
Now get prepared to be educated some more. Ready?
1. Why would the WBO want a chump change fighter as their champion when they have a millionaire megastar reigning? The bigger the fighter, the bigger the purses, the bigger the SANCTION FEES. Why do you think the WBO didn't give a fuck about Marquez languishing as the no.1 contender? Marquez was a nobody.
2. The WBO never stripped Naz of anything, he chucked the title to fight Barrera.
3. Tom Johnson - IBF champion
Wilfredo Vazquez - Lineal and WBA champion (stripped for unifying with Naz)
Cesar Soto - WBC champion
Now let me make this easy - whilst Naz held the WBO title he beat the current lineal, WBC, WBA and IBF champion. That makes him the
lineal, unified king of the featherweight division.
So what two titles you on about? :vd:
It's obvious you copied and paste somebody else post from where ever the hell you read it from and are trying to pass it off as your own. While you got the right words in. And the key phrases. You ain't using them right. Cuz you don't really know what you talking about. Let me fix your inconsistencies with straight facts.
((Accusing me of plagiarism :vd:))
Yet again you show a shocking naivety in all matters boxing.
Marquez lost to Norwood (in a fight so ugly HBO were appalled) 4 weeks before Naz beat Soto. So explain how Naz-Marquez was gonna happen at that time?
Only hardcore fans understand lineal. Alphabet unifications SELL!!! HBO paid Naz $5million for the Soto unification.
Now, as anyone can see, i've already unequivocally proven that Marquez ducked Naz. Marquez said it. Beristain said it. Their former match maker said it.
But you answer me this - name me an elite fighter Marquez beat that was in his prime. Just one. And I said elite. Or a world title Marquez had won. Just one. And I said one world title. Back in the day that would warrant him a shot at Naz?
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Marquez was offered a career high payday of $400,000 to face Naz in the year 2000. He turned it down claiming he wasn't ready for Naz, even though he spent two years as WBO no.1 mandatory. Naz ruined the unfortunate Augie Sanchez instead.
The question is - where would Marquez be without this duck of Naz? It was clearly a great move. Fact.
Discuss
That right there says it all. Marquez waited and waited for Hamed to fight him. While Hamed begged and begged the WBO to let him fight some one else. After giving him so many passes the WBO was considering stripping him of the title. But Hamed promised he would fight Marquez after he fought Cesar Soto. He wanted to unify the titles first. Hamed beat Soto in one of the worst fights of 1999. Marquez canceled his fight with Roque Cassiani to prepare for Hamed. Than in one of the most skanless, cowardice moves ever in Boxing history Hamed backs out of the fight and in turn faces Vuyani Bungu. Now Bungu was a fine Super Bantamweight. But he had never fought as a Featherweight before. Not to mention he hadn't fought in over a year. Yet some how Hamed deemed him worthy of a title shot. Marquez considered legal action but decided against it. He was done with Hamed and his games. Hamed creamed Bungu while Marquez went on with the Cassiani fight. Afterwards Hamed for like the 10th time again told Marquez he would fight him. Marquez said if he was serious about fighting him give him $500,000. Hamed showed he wasn't serious and said no.
90% of your post is utter drivel.
This little snippet comes from Antonio Curtis, Marquez former matchmaker at Forum Boxing - "When the WBO said they were going to make a unification, I forgot who the hell they were supposed to be fighting. What happened is this, as soon as they told us no, we took another fight. As soon as we took another fight, then they called us when we had already signed for another fight and
then they wanted us to fight Hamed, Curtis recalled, of those events. Now, I wanted to pull that fight, to fight Hamed. But Nacho said no. He would've gotten a half-million for the fight and Nacho turned that fight down." http://www.maxboxing.com/kim/kim031607.asp
There you go. Marquez shamelessly ducked Naz. Fact.
A link that leads no where. Just like your post. And I here i though you would actually provide something of substance. I'm disappointed in myself for thinking that. Anyway this is pretty easy standard stuff. The champion must defend against his mandatory within 6 months to a year. Hamed went over 2 years avoiding Marquez. In the mean time he fought an ancient fighter (Wilfredo Vazquez) a seriously out classed fighter (Wayne McCullough) and domestic club fighter (Paul Ingle). That's what you call ducking 101 there
All three much bigger names than Marquez back then. Anyway, i've something even better, straight from the horses mouth Juan Manuel Marquez admitting his duckage of the Naz fella.
Read and weep boy -
Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed
Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared. They did not give me sufficient time to get prepared."
"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. It is almost the same way with fighting (Freddie) Norwood. You have to knock him out to get the victory."
Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."
Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, criticized the Hamed camp's negotiating tactics. "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "They are only playing with our heads. We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."
LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...
There you go, you can't argue with the facts, Marquez turned down a career high payday because he didn't feel ready for Naz.
Marquez bottled the Naz fight. Fact.
Thank you. 2 years he waited and waited. But Hamed wanted none. You said it yourself. Can't argue facts. You provided the proof. For 2 years Hamed ducked him. He had no problem fighting chumps like Ingle. A fighter who'd own mother didn't know she had a son named Paul. But looked for every excuse not to fight Marquez
It's like this. Hamed was a good entertaining fighter. Fun to watch. But an ATG he is more certainly not. Facts don’t lie. And facts are Hamed never beat a real good fighter who was in his prime. All the fighters he fought who were a name came in with ridiculous amount of mileage on them. When Hamed fought Barrera. Barrera had already fought 55 times. Cesar Soto 63. Wilfredo Vazquez 59. Kevin Kelley 50. Vuyani Bungu 39. Tom Johnson 48. Manuel Medina 59. The ones that didn’t Paul Ingle and Wayne McCullough were not as good as the previous fighters mentioned. McCullough was average. Ingle was straight garbage.
The two year wait just harms Marquez case for the duck. If he spent that long chasing Naz how come he said NO the first opportunity he got? Don't make sense. The truth is Marquez/Beristain never wanted any part of Naz.
Here's a little quiz for you.
What do these guys have in common - Coto, Johnson, Medina, Kelly, McCullough, Bungu and Vazquez? That's right, they had all won "world" titles before Naz bashed them. Even Paul Ingle won the IBF title in his very next fight after losing to Naz.
Marquez had how many world titles back in Naz day? That's right, ZERO!! Marquez didn't become a "world" champion until bascially TWO years AFTER Naz had retired.
Just like Marquez the man himself said - "I want to fight Naz when I have a world title to make it more fair"
Marquez simply wasn't ready for Naz back then. And Naz had bigger fish to fry unifying the featherweight divison.
The duck explained. Fact.
What big fish? Cesar Soto? Come on now. Hamed didn't care about unifiying. But trying to unify was the only excuse he had left that the WBO was going to buy. They were set to strip him for his shameful ducking of Marquez. That's a fact. Hamed backed himself into a unification bout when he used it as an excuse. Why you think he never went after the other 2 titles?
As usual you display an astounding lack of knowledge of the boxing business.
Now get prepared to be educated some more. Ready?
1. Why would the WBO want a chump change fighter as their champion when they have a millionaire megastar reigning? The bigger the fighter, the bigger the purses, the bigger the SANCTION FEES. Why do you think the WBO didn't give a fuck about Marquez languishing as the no.1 contender? Marquez was a nobody.
2. The WBO never stripped Naz of anything, he chucked the title to fight Barrera.
3. Tom Johnson - IBF champion
Wilfredo Vazquez - Lineal and WBA champion (stripped for unifying with Naz)
Cesar Soto - WBC champion
Now let me make this easy - whilst Naz held the WBO title he beat the current lineal, WBC, WBA and IBF champion. That makes him the
lineal, unified king of the featherweight division.
So what two titles you on about? :vd:
It's obvious you copied and paste somebody else post from where ever the hell you read it from and are trying to pass it off as your own. While you got the right words in. And the key phrases. You ain't using them right. Cuz you don't really know what you talking about. Let me fix your inconsistencies with straight facts.
((Accusing me of plagiarism :vd:))
Yet again you show a shocking naivety in all matters boxing.
Marquez lost to Norwood (in a fight so ugly HBO were appalled) 4 weeks before Naz beat Soto. So explain how Naz-Marquez was gonna happen at that time?
Only hardcore fans understand lineal. Alphabet unifications SELL!!! HBO paid Naz $5million for the Soto unification.
Now, as anyone can see, i've already unequivocally proven that Marquez ducked Naz. Marquez said it. Beristain said it. Their former match maker said it.
But you answer me this - name me an elite fighter Marquez beat that was in his prime. Just one. And I said elite. Or a world title Marquez had won. Just one. And I said one world title. Back in the day that would warrant him a shot at Naz?
Hmmm :scratchchin:
It seems to me the FACTS Fenster is putting forward are by far the superior. I really carnt see a way out of this for ya VD :beatup:
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mattyhitman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Marquez was offered a career high payday of $400,000 to face Naz in the year 2000. He turned it down claiming he wasn't ready for Naz, even though he spent two years as WBO no.1 mandatory. Naz ruined the unfortunate Augie Sanchez instead.
The question is - where would Marquez be without this duck of Naz? It was clearly a great move. Fact.
Discuss
That right there says it all. Marquez waited and waited for Hamed to fight him. While Hamed begged and begged the WBO to let him fight some one else. After giving him so many passes the WBO was considering stripping him of the title. But Hamed promised he would fight Marquez after he fought Cesar Soto. He wanted to unify the titles first. Hamed beat Soto in one of the worst fights of 1999. Marquez canceled his fight with Roque Cassiani to prepare for Hamed. Than in one of the most skanless, cowardice moves ever in Boxing history Hamed backs out of the fight and in turn faces Vuyani Bungu. Now Bungu was a fine Super Bantamweight. But he had never fought as a Featherweight before. Not to mention he hadn't fought in over a year. Yet some how Hamed deemed him worthy of a title shot. Marquez considered legal action but decided against it. He was done with Hamed and his games. Hamed creamed Bungu while Marquez went on with the Cassiani fight. Afterwards Hamed for like the 10th time again told Marquez he would fight him. Marquez said if he was serious about fighting him give him $500,000. Hamed showed he wasn't serious and said no.
90% of your post is utter drivel.
This little snippet comes from Antonio Curtis, Marquez former matchmaker at Forum Boxing - "When the WBO said they were going to make a unification, I forgot who the hell they were supposed to be fighting. What happened is this, as soon as they told us no, we took another fight. As soon as we took another fight, then they called us when we had already signed for another fight and
then they wanted us to fight Hamed, Curtis recalled, of those events. Now, I wanted to pull that fight, to fight Hamed. But Nacho said no. He would've gotten a half-million for the fight and Nacho turned that fight down." http://www.maxboxing.com/kim/kim031607.asp
There you go. Marquez shamelessly ducked Naz. Fact.
A link that leads no where. Just like your post. And I here i though you would actually provide something of substance. I'm disappointed in myself for thinking that. Anyway this is pretty easy standard stuff. The champion must defend against his mandatory within 6 months to a year. Hamed went over 2 years avoiding Marquez. In the mean time he fought an ancient fighter (Wilfredo Vazquez) a seriously out classed fighter (Wayne McCullough) and domestic club fighter (Paul Ingle). That's what you call ducking 101 there
All three much bigger names than Marquez back then. Anyway, i've something even better, straight from the horses mouth Juan Manuel Marquez admitting his duckage of the Naz fella.
Read and weep boy -
Featherweight Marquez said no to Hamed
Juan Manuel Marquez conceded Friday that he turned down a fight with Prince Naseem Hamed, the World Boxing Organization featherweight champion. "I had been waiting two years," said Marquez, speaking through a translator. "Now they want the fight. I wasn't prepared. They did not give me sufficient time to get prepared."
"Hamed is difficult to fight. Hamed is like a wrestler," Marquez said. "He will toss you around if he can. It is almost the same way with fighting (Freddie) Norwood. You have to knock him out to get the victory."
Marquez said he would like to fight Hamed as the champion of one of the other sanctioning bodies. Otherwise, Marquez said, fighting Hamed "is not on even terms."
Nacho Beristain, Marquez's manager, criticized the Hamed camp's negotiating tactics. "They want to get us when all of our energies are gone (from negotiating)," Beristain said. "They are only playing with our heads. We never want to fight (Hamed). Who do they think they are? They came out with an offer of $400,000. It is not worth it."
LAS VEGAS RJ:SPORTS: Featherweight Marquez said no to H...
There you go, you can't argue with the facts, Marquez turned down a career high payday because he didn't feel ready for Naz.
Marquez bottled the Naz fight. Fact.
Thank you. 2 years he waited and waited. But Hamed wanted none. You said it yourself. Can't argue facts. You provided the proof. For 2 years Hamed ducked him. He had no problem fighting chumps like Ingle. A fighter who'd own mother didn't know she had a son named Paul. But looked for every excuse not to fight Marquez
It's like this. Hamed was a good entertaining fighter. Fun to watch. But an ATG he is more certainly not. Facts don’t lie. And facts are Hamed never beat a real good fighter who was in his prime. All the fighters he fought who were a name came in with ridiculous amount of mileage on them. When Hamed fought Barrera. Barrera had already fought 55 times. Cesar Soto 63. Wilfredo Vazquez 59. Kevin Kelley 50. Vuyani Bungu 39. Tom Johnson 48. Manuel Medina 59. The ones that didn’t Paul Ingle and Wayne McCullough were not as good as the previous fighters mentioned. McCullough was average. Ingle was straight garbage.
The two year wait just harms Marquez case for the duck. If he spent that long chasing Naz how come he said NO the first opportunity he got? Don't make sense. The truth is Marquez/Beristain never wanted any part of Naz.
Here's a little quiz for you.
What do these guys have in common - Coto, Johnson, Medina, Kelly, McCullough, Bungu and Vazquez? That's right, they had all won "world" titles before Naz bashed them. Even Paul Ingle won the IBF title in his very next fight after losing to Naz.
Marquez had how many world titles back in Naz day? That's right, ZERO!! Marquez didn't become a "world" champion until bascially TWO years AFTER Naz had retired.
Just like Marquez the man himself said - "I want to fight Naz when I have a world title to make it more fair"
Marquez simply wasn't ready for Naz back then. And Naz had bigger fish to fry unifying the featherweight divison.
The duck explained. Fact.
What big fish? Cesar Soto? Come on now. Hamed didn't care about unifiying. But trying to unify was the only excuse he had left that the WBO was going to buy. They were set to strip him for his shameful ducking of Marquez. That's a fact. Hamed backed himself into a unification bout when he used it as an excuse. Why you think he never went after the other 2 titles?
As usual you display an astounding lack of knowledge of the boxing business.
Now get prepared to be educated some more. Ready?
1. Why would the WBO want a chump change fighter as their champion when they have a millionaire megastar reigning? The bigger the fighter, the bigger the purses, the bigger the SANCTION FEES. Why do you think the WBO didn't give a fuck about Marquez languishing as the no.1 contender? Marquez was a nobody.
2. The WBO never stripped Naz of anything, he chucked the title to fight Barrera.
3. Tom Johnson - IBF champion
Wilfredo Vazquez - Lineal and WBA champion (stripped for unifying with Naz)
Cesar Soto - WBC champion
Now let me make this easy - whilst Naz held the WBO title he beat the current lineal, WBC, WBA and IBF champion. That makes him the
lineal, unified king of the featherweight division.
So what two titles you on about? :vd:
It's obvious you copied and paste somebody else post from where ever the hell you read it from and are trying to pass it off as your own. While you got the right words in. And the key phrases. You ain't using them right. Cuz you don't really know what you talking about. Let me fix your inconsistencies with straight facts.
((Accusing me of plagiarism :vd:))
Yet again you show a shocking naivety in all matters boxing.
Marquez lost to Norwood (in a fight so ugly HBO were appalled) 4 weeks before Naz beat Soto. So explain how Naz-Marquez was gonna happen at that time?
Only hardcore fans understand lineal. Alphabet unifications SELL!!! HBO paid Naz $5million for the Soto unification.
Now, as anyone can see, i've already unequivocally proven that Marquez ducked Naz. Marquez said it. Beristain said it. Their former match maker said it.
But you answer me this - name me an elite fighter Marquez beat that was in his prime. Just one. And I said elite. Or a world title Marquez had won. Just one. And I said one world title. Back in the day that would warrant him a shot at Naz?
Hmmm :scratchchin:
It seems to me the FACTS Fenster is putting forward are by far the superior. I really carnt see a way out of this for ya VD :beatup:
Clearly you're a smart fella Mattyhitman.
Fenster deals in facts, VD deals in fantasy. It's really no contest. Fact.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
Unrelated, but: Thanks for breaking the "Reply with Quote" chain. It was getting hard to follow.
:)
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
All of this may be true, but JMM is miles ahead of him in legacy and heart. Fact.;)
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
All my points are backed up with irrefutable evidence. The only thing that's failed is your boxing knowledge.
Your question has nothing to do with the topic. However, I am willing to give you a go...
Name me all the prime featherweights Naz ducked between 1997 and 2000?
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
All my points are backed up with irrefutable evidence. The only thing that's failed is your boxing knowledge.
Your question has nothing to do with the topic. However, I am willing to give you a go...
Name me all the prime featherweights Naz ducked between 1997 and 2000?
That's four times. Come on now Fenster. Back in the day there was never a need for me to ask twice. You always had an answer. They were wrong like 90% of the time. But you at least gave one. And you were quick with them too. Now here I am asking 4 times? I always considered you to be a lot of things. Never thought coward/duck/yellow was one of them.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
All my points are backed up with irrefutable evidence. The only thing that's failed is your boxing knowledge.
Your question has nothing to do with the topic. However, I am willing to give you a go...
Name me all the prime featherweights Naz ducked between 1997 and 2000?
That's four times. Come on now Fenster. Back in the day there was never a need for me to ask twice. You always had an answer. They were wrong like 90% of the time. But you at least gave one. And you were quick with them too. Now here I am asking 4 times? I always considered you to be a lot of things. Never thought coward/duck/yellow was one of them.
Come now VD. How can I name a prime/elite featherweight between 1997 and 2000 if I don't know of one? In this particualr instance I will bow to your superior knowledge. Please educate me.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
All my points are backed up with irrefutable evidence. The only thing that's failed is your boxing knowledge.
Your question has nothing to do with the topic. However, I am willing to give you a go...
Name me all the prime featherweights Naz ducked between 1997 and 2000?
That's four times. Come on now Fenster. Back in the day there was never a need for me to ask twice. You always had an answer. They were wrong like 90% of the time. But you at least gave one. And you were quick with them too. Now here I am asking 4 times? I always considered you to be a lot of things. Never thought coward/duck/yellow was one of them.
Come now VD. How can I name a prime/elite featherweight between 1997 and 2000 if I don't know of one? In this particualr instance I will bow to your superior knowledge. Please educate me.
Don't play modest with me. Your google and boxing rec skills are legendary. Shouldn't be to hard for you. Not only that. I never said it had to be a featherweight. Name me a elite fighter Naseem Hamed beat or even fought who was in his prime. Any weight.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Funny how Hamed is only really considered " Great " mostly by Brit's . But most fans would concede that Marquez is a great fighter who fought the very best , and beat many top top fighters. He wasn't afraid to lose to GREATS .
You can not really say the same for Hamed , he beat some good fighters , but he lost to the only truly elite fighter he fought , who was any were near his prime in MAB .
So if Fenster is right , in that Marquez ducked Hamed , then you have to say its the greatest career move ever , as he is now a GREAT and Hamed is not.
Or if Hamed ducked Marquez , all he did was keep his unbeaten record for longer , until he met MAB. I feel Marquez would have got off the floor early to hand Hamed his ass , may have even stopped him.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
All my points are backed up with irrefutable evidence. The only thing that's failed is your boxing knowledge.
Your question has nothing to do with the topic. However, I am willing to give you a go...
Name me all the prime featherweights Naz ducked between 1997 and 2000?
That's four times. Come on now Fenster. Back in the day there was never a need for me to ask twice. You always had an answer. They were wrong like 90% of the time. But you at least gave one. And you were quick with them too. Now here I am asking 4 times? I always considered you to be a lot of things. Never thought coward/duck/yellow was one of them.
Come now VD. How can I name a prime/elite featherweight between 1997 and 2000 if I don't know of one? In this particualr instance I will bow to your superior knowledge. Please educate me.
Don't play modest with me. Your google and boxing rec skills are legendary. Shouldn't be to hard for you. Not only that. I never said it had to be a featherweight. Name me a elite fighter Naseem Hamed beat or even fought who was in his prime. Any weight.
He was a featherweight from winning the "world" title to retirement. So you'll do well to find someone he fought outside that. It's like asking - what prime/elite welterweight did Tyson ever beat? Nonsense.
Define elite?
I would say winning a "world" title and having a top ten Ring rating qualifies you as an elite featherweight, therefore - Robinson, Johnson, Vazquez, Kelley, Medina, Soto, Ingle, Bungu etc..
Naz beat plenty of elite fighters sharing his weight-class. Fact.
Next?
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dark Lord Al
Funny how Hamed is only really considered " Great " mostly by Brit's . But most fans would concede that Marquez is a great fighter who fought the very best , and beat many top top fighters. He wasn't afraid to lose to GREATS .
You can not really say the same for Hamed , he beat some good fighters , but he lost to the only truly elite fighter he fought , who was any were near his prime in MAB .
So if Fenster is right , in that Marquez ducked Hamed , then you have to say its the greatest career move ever , as he is now a GREAT and Hamed is not.
Or if Hamed ducked Marquez , all he did was keep his unbeaten record for longer , until he met MAB. I feel Marquez would have got off the floor early to hand Hamed his ass , may have even stopped him.
Marquez could have lost to Naz and still went on to become the great fighter he is.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dark Lord Al
Funny how Hamed is only really considered " Great " mostly by Brit's . But most fans would concede that Marquez is a great fighter who fought the very best , and beat many top top fighters. He wasn't afraid to lose to GREATS .
You can not really say the same for Hamed , he beat some good fighters , but he lost to the only truly elite fighter he fought , who was any were near his prime in MAB .
So if Fenster is right , in that Marquez ducked Hamed , then you have to say its the greatest career move ever , as he is now a GREAT and Hamed is not.
Or if Hamed ducked Marquez , all he did was keep his unbeaten record for longer , until he met MAB. I feel Marquez would have got off the floor early to hand Hamed his ass , may have even stopped him.
Marquez could have lost to Naz and still went on to become the great fighter he is.
Indeed that is correct , but he didnt fight Hamed and is still regarded as great , so did he need to fight the yorkshire limbo dancer ? It would seem not.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
All my points are backed up with irrefutable evidence. The only thing that's failed is your boxing knowledge.
Your question has nothing to do with the topic. However, I am willing to give you a go...
Name me all the prime featherweights Naz ducked between 1997 and 2000?
That's four times. Come on now Fenster. Back in the day there was never a need for me to ask twice. You always had an answer. They were wrong like 90% of the time. But you at least gave one. And you were quick with them too. Now here I am asking 4 times? I always considered you to be a lot of things. Never thought coward/duck/yellow was one of them.
Come now VD. How can I name a prime/elite featherweight between 1997 and 2000 if I don't know of one? In this particualr instance I will bow to your superior knowledge. Please educate me.
Don't play modest with me. Your google and boxing rec skills are legendary. Shouldn't be to hard for you. Not only that. I never said it had to be a featherweight. Name me a elite fighter Naseem Hamed beat or even fought who was in his prime. Any weight.
He was a featherweight from winning the "world" title to retirement. So you'll do well to find someone he fought outside that. It's like asking - what prime/elite welterweight did Tyson ever beat? Nonsense.
Define elite?
I would say winning a "world" title and having a top ten Ring rating qualifies you as an elite featherweight, therefore - Robinson, Johnson, Vazquez, Kelley, Medina, Soto, Ingle, Bungu etc..
Naz beat plenty of elite fighters sharing his weight-class. Fact.
Next?
:vd: This was hilarious and sad at the same time. Going by your way of thinking, I think Trevor Berbick place in history should be reevaluated. The man did beat the Greatest. No bigger elite name than that. Oh that's right. Ali was a walking corpse. Calling him shot would actually of been a complimeant. Like a lot of those names Hamed beat wasn't in his prime. Not only that but some of the guys you listed wouldn't be called elite by there own mother.
Steve Robinson: Are you fucking kidding me? The man was never good much less elite. He was average on his best day. The cult following this clown has in the UK shows the true lack of knowledge across the ocean. Fact
Tom Johnson: A good fighter in his prime. By the time Hamed got him he was taking part in his 49th career fight. He was on a serious decline. If it wasn't for a gift win against Jose Badillo he wouldn't even of been champion. Fact
Wilfredo Vazquez Sr: A boaderline HOF fighter. I don't knock this win for Hamed cuz Vazquez was the lineal champion. But to even think he was prime is down right moronic. The Hamed fight was Vazquez 60th career fight. Fact
Kevin Kelley: Hamed's debut was an exciting one. Against a worn out Kelley who was taking part in his 51st career fight. Fact
Cesar Soto: Never was called elite. But he had 63 career fights. So he was perfect for Hamed. Fact
Paul Ingle: LOL. Stop it. Just stop it
Vuyani Bungu: Smaller fighter who moved up in weight. Had 39 career fights coming in. But had been inactive for over a year. Fact
Manuel Medina: The man had already fought 59 times before facing Hamed. Fact
No elite fighters in there prime ever shared a ring with Hamed. Fact. This was to easy.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Again you show you just read boxing. You don't really watch it. HBO might of been appalled with Marquez-Norwood. But the blame was placed on Norwood. They were also down right disgusted with Hamed-Soto. Lampley was embarrassed. Merchant called it one of the worse fights ever. People walked out of it. Both stated Soto's title was meaningless. HBO was forced into the Soto fight cuz of it's contract. They never wanted the fight. It's the reason it was held in Detroit and not Las Vegas. Come on now. It's really not that hard to figure out
Every time someone answers a question with a question is cuz they have no answer. I see you refused to answer my question regarding what elite fighter Hamed beat in his prime. Not surprised. Cuz one doesn't exist. Even more proof that Hamed not only ducked Marquez but ducked every good fighter out there.
As for your question? I'll answer it anyway. He was the uncrowned WBA champion. Anybody that seen the fight knows that Marquez deserved the win over Norwood. HBO had him winning. If you argue that point than it clearly tells me you never seen the fight. Facts are facts. I find it hilarious you got the audacity to ask what Marquez did to earn a shot. While at the same time try and make it seem like Paul Ingle was worthy of one.
An utterly embarrassing guess at the actual reality. Here's the truth...
1) Soto-Naz was held in Detroit because it holds one of the biggest Arab populations in the world (outside of the Middle East). They sold 13,000+ tickets for that fight. Fact.
2) The HBO team, although slightly favouring Marquez over Norwood, stated it could have gone either way. Fact.
3) Whether Marquez beat Norwood or not, it was after this fight that Naz offered him his shot, which as we all now know, courtesy of my bombproof factual evidence, he sadly refused. Fact.
So in summation - Marquez was given a shot to become the lineal featherweight champion, offered the biggest payday of his life and the chance to become an overnight boxing star.
Naz wanted it. HBO wanted it. The fans wanted it. Marquez bottled it. Fact.
Third time you have failed to answer my question. I don't blame you. Any attempt would lead to failure. You would pretty much be destroying your own points instead of me doing it
All my points are backed up with irrefutable evidence. The only thing that's failed is your boxing knowledge.
Your question has nothing to do with the topic. However, I am willing to give you a go...
Name me all the prime featherweights Naz ducked between 1997 and 2000?
That's four times. Come on now Fenster. Back in the day there was never a need for me to ask twice. You always had an answer. They were wrong like 90% of the time. But you at least gave one. And you were quick with them too. Now here I am asking 4 times? I always considered you to be a lot of things. Never thought coward/duck/yellow was one of them.
Come now VD. How can I name a prime/elite featherweight between 1997 and 2000 if I don't know of one? In this particualr instance I will bow to your superior knowledge. Please educate me.
Don't play modest with me. Your google and boxing rec skills are legendary. Shouldn't be to hard for you. Not only that. I never said it had to be a featherweight. Name me a elite fighter Naseem Hamed beat or even fought who was in his prime. Any weight.
He was a featherweight from winning the "world" title to retirement. So you'll do well to find someone he fought outside that. It's like asking - what prime/elite welterweight did Tyson ever beat? Nonsense.
Define elite?
I would say winning a "world" title and having a top ten Ring rating qualifies you as an elite featherweight, therefore - Robinson, Johnson, Vazquez, Kelley, Medina, Soto, Ingle, Bungu etc..
Naz beat plenty of elite fighters sharing his weight-class. Fact.
Next?
:vd: This was hilarious and sad at the same time. Going by your way of thinking, I think Trevor Berbick place in history should be reevaluated. The man did beat the Greatest. No bigger elite name than that. Oh that's right. Ali was a walking corpse. Calling him shot would actually of been a complimeant. Like a lot of those names Hamed beat wasn't in his prime. Not only that but some of the guys you listed wouldn't be called elite by there own mother.
Steve Robinson: Are you fucking kidding me? The man was never good much less elite. He was average on his best day. The cult following this clown has in the UK shows the true lack of knowledge across the ocean. Fact
Tom Johnson: A good fighter in his prime. By the time Hamed got him he was taking part in his 49th career fight. He was on a serious decline. If it wasn't for a gift win against Jose Badillo he wouldn't even of been champion. Fact
Wilfredo Vazquez Sr: A boaderline HOF fighter. I don't knock this win for Hamed cuz Vazquez was the lineal champion. But to even think he was prime is down right moronic. The Hamed fight was Vazquez 60th career fight. Fact
Kevin Kelley: Hamed's debut was an exciting one. Against a worn out Kelley who was taking part in his 51st career fight. Fact
Cesar Soto: Never was called elite. But he had 63 career fights. So he was perfect for Hamed. Fact
Paul Ingle: LOL. Stop it. Just stop it
Vuyani Bungu: Smaller fighter who moved up in weight. Had 39 career fights coming in. But had been inactive for over a year. Fact
Manuel Medina: The man had already fought 59 times before facing Hamed. Fact
No elite fighters in there prime ever shared a ring with Hamed. Fact. This was to easy.
Complete and utter laughable codswollop.
Was Ali a world champion or rated top ten by the Ring when Berbick beat him? Pathetic comparision. Fact.
All of those fighters listed, whatever your ill-informed opinion of them, were ELITE featherweights (regarded amongst the worlds best) when Naz beat them. Not ONE retired after losing to Naz, some going on to win further titles. Fact.
What more can a fighter do than wipe-out all the most decorated fighters in his particular division?
So, here we are again, for the 4th time, tell me an elite featherweight Naz ducked in his time? Because if you can't name one your arguement is totally invalid. Fact.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Urgh these multi-quotes are horrible!!
h
o
w
a
r
e
y
o
u
s
u
p
p
o
s
e
d
t
o
r
e
a
d
t
h
i
s
?
?
Anyway, this is a great debate! It's like watching Tennis!! ;D
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
I haven't read the whole thread and I think it's clear that Marquez will leave a better legacy than Hamed, however to think Hamed would duck Marquez back in 1999/2000 doesn't make sense. At that time Marquez had fought one notable oppoonent and lost that fight. It wasn't until around 2004 that he actually started fighting marquee fights and became a p4p fighter.
1999 Hamed would probably have smoked Marquez boots the way Pac should have in round 1 of their first fight
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
I haven't read the whole thread and I think it's clear that Marquez will leave a better legacy than Hamed, however to think Hamed would duck Marquez back in 1999/2000 doesn't make sense. At that time Marquez had fought one notable oppoonent and lost that fight. It wasn't until around 2004 that he actually started fighting marquee fights and became a p4p fighter.
1999 Hamed would probably have smoked Marquez boots the way Pac should have in round 1 of their first fight
Agreed !
Naz fought the top guy's in his weight division at that time, took belts off them and reigned supreme. Marquez clearly ducked him ;)
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J da Bomba
Urgh these multi-quotes are horrible!!
Anyway, this is a great debate! It's like watching Tennis!! ;D
Except that it's a mismatch. I'm Federer he's Sharapova.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Complete and utter laughable codswollop.
Was Ali a world champion or rated top ten by the Ring when Berbick beat him? Pathetic comparision. Fact.
All of those fighters listed, whatever your ill-informed opinion of them, were ELITE featherweights (regarded amongst the worlds best) when Naz beat them. Not ONE retired after losing to Naz, some going on to win further titles. Fact.
What more can a fighter do than wipe-out all the most decorated fighters in his particular division?
So, here we are again, for the 4th time, tell me an elite featherweight Naz ducked in his time? Because if you can't name one your arguement is totally invalid. Fact.
I now understand the problem. You don't know the meaning of the word elite. That's become obvious. You think just cuz a fighter held a title than he was elite. So I'm thinking you must of considered Gavin Rees an elite fighter when he was holding his strap, right? It don't work that way. My opinion is my opinion. But assuming people know the true meaning of the word elite it's pretty much universally known that Paul Ingle, Steve Robinson, Cesar Soto and to a point Manuel Medina were never elite fighters even in there primes. That's a fact. The others were elite at one point in there careers. But they were all pretty much shot fighters when Hamed fought them. Tell me what other championship did Tom Johnson win after Hamed? Kevin Kelley. What title he pick up. None to both. As well as to Wilfredo Vazquez and Vuyani Bungu. So what were these other championships these guys won after Hamed that you lied about? There isn't any. None of them did nothing that meant anything after Hamed. Cuz they were all shot fighters when they fought Hamed. Fact.
You don't think I see through you? Your using word Featherweight as a security blanket. Not no more. I'm tearing it up. Junior Jones, Kennedy Mckinney, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather, Angel Manfredy were elite fighters (Manfredy being the exception) that expressed interest in facing Hamed. Fact. How many of those did he fight? None. Fact. He ducked one after the other. Another fact. They all didn't all share the same weight class as him. But neither did Bungu. And they still fought. But not against the others. Hamed's ducking skills truly were elite.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J da Bomba
Urgh these multi-quotes are horrible!!
Anyway, this is a great debate! It's like watching Tennis!! ;D
Except that it's a mismatch. I'm Federer he's Sharapova.
If he's talking appearance wise than I must certainly am Sharapova. But your no Federer. Your Venus Williams.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
I haven't read the whole thread and I think it's clear that Marquez will leave a better legacy than Hamed, however to think Hamed would duck Marquez back in 1999/2000 doesn't make sense. At that time Marquez had fought one notable oppoonent and lost that fight. It wasn't until around 2004 that he actually started fighting marquee fights and became a p4p fighter.
1999 Hamed would probably have smoked Marquez boots the way Pac should have in round 1 of their first fight
I think that Hamed had nothing but one weakness: his mind. Once MAB did beat him, his aura shattered, just like his self confidence and he was never the same afterward, even if he hasn't been mashed to pieces. Would he have continued and get a few meaningful victories it would have been something interesting to compare but now that Hamed gave up when he shouldn't, it's clear that Marquez and MAB got better legacy in the meantime.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Nameless
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BIG H
I haven't read the whole thread and I think it's clear that Marquez will leave a better legacy than Hamed, however to think Hamed would duck Marquez back in 1999/2000 doesn't make sense. At that time Marquez had fought one notable oppoonent and lost that fight. It wasn't until around 2004 that he actually started fighting marquee fights and became a p4p fighter.
1999 Hamed would probably have smoked Marquez boots the way Pac should have in round 1 of their first fight
I think that Hamed had nothing but one weakness: his mind. Once MAB did beat him, his aura shattered, just like his self confidence and he was never the same afterward, even if he hasn't been mashed to pieces. Would he have continued and get a few meaningful victories it would have been something interesting to compare but now that Hamed gave up when he shouldn't, it's clear that Marquez and MAB got better legacy in the meantime.
Hamed had several weaknesses that were erased or ignored cuz of his debilitating power. Which was very real and his greatest strength. Actually it was his only strength. And he knew it. It's why his opposition was hand picked. He could get away with the tools he had against decent, good opponents. But not against the elite (see Barrera). Hamed knew that there will be talk about him avoiding the best. But as long as he was spectacularly knocking out the opposition he was facing he would have his backers (his 3 punches thrown knock out of Said Lawal remains on of my all time favorites). Sadly for Hamed, Barrera put an end to his little charade
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Maybe I was too young and uninterested in the boxing politics back then, just enjoyed the fighting, but I'd always thought of Naz as the ducking fighter.
Back in the day I loved watching him, his style was a fans favourite. But as time wore on I appreciated him less and less. It wasn't until the last Naz thread on here that I actually even considered him among the elite. I always thought he fought half decent opponents, knocked them out, then faced a good opponent and got beat.
Back then though, I didn't even know who he was fighting, I just liked watching it.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Complete and utter laughable codswollop.
Was Ali a world champion or rated top ten by the Ring when Berbick beat him? Pathetic comparision. Fact.
All of those fighters listed, whatever your ill-informed opinion of them, were ELITE featherweights (regarded amongst the worlds best) when Naz beat them. Not ONE retired after losing to Naz, some going on to win further titles. Fact.
What more can a fighter do than wipe-out all the most decorated fighters in his particular division?
So, here we are again, for the 4th time, tell me an elite featherweight Naz ducked in his time? Because if you can't name one your arguement is totally invalid. Fact.
I now understand the problem. You don't know the meaning of the word elite. That's become obvious. You think just cuz a fighter held a title than he was elite. So I'm thinking you must of considered Gavin Rees an elite fighter when he was holding his strap, right? It don't work that way. My opinion is my opinion. But assuming people know the true meaning of the word elite it's pretty much universally known that Paul Ingle, Steve Robinson, Cesar Soto and to a point Manuel Medina were never elite fighters even in there primes. That's a fact. The others were elite at one point in there careers. But they were all pretty much shot fighters when Hamed fought them. Tell me what other championship did Tom Johnson win after Hamed? Kevin Kelley. What title he pick up. None to both. As well as to Wilfredo Vazquez and Vuyani Bungu. So what were these other championships these guys won after Hamed that you lied about? There isn't any. None of them did nothing that meant anything after Hamed. Cuz they were all shot fighters when they fought Hamed. Fact.
You don't think I see through you? Your using word Featherweight as a security blanket. Not no more. I'm tearing it up. Junior Jones, Kennedy Mckinney, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather, Angel Manfredy were elite fighters (Manfredy being the exception) that expressed interest in facing Hamed. Fact. How many of those did he fight? None. Fact. He ducked one after the other. Another fact. They all didn't all share the same weight class as him. But neither did Bungu. And they still fought. But not against the others. Hamed's ducking skills truly were elite.
Yet again an utterly shocking lack of knowledge :vd:
1. Junior Jones and Kennedy Mckinney were elite fighters? They lost to Naz victims (Jones to Ingle and McKinney to Bungu). What makes them any better than the other champions Naz smashed? It is also a FACT that Jones ducked out of the March 11 2000 date that Bungu took (BBC News | SPORT | Hamed fight called off). We've already established Marquez ducked Naz. Morales lost out to Barrera. Mayweather, Manfredy, Gatti - just about every fighter in the late 90s was linked with Naz because of the MONEY!!! All were operating at bigger weights. There's no evidence that Naz ducked anyone. You are tearing up nothing. Fact.
2. I said SOME went on to win titles (Medina and Ingle). Kelley was deemed good enough to fight both Morales and Barrera after Naz sparked him. I never lie. Fact.
3. You're the one that has the problem understaning the word elite. Did I call anyone anything other than elite in their weight-class? That's a no. Fact.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J da Bomba
Urgh these multi-quotes are horrible!!
Anyway, this is a great debate! It's like watching Tennis!! ;D
Except that it's a mismatch. I'm Federer he's Sharapova.
If he's talking appearance wise than I must certainly am Sharapova. But your no Federer. Your Venus Williams.
So you're admitting you're a tart? Just as I thought.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J da Bomba
Urgh these multi-quotes are horrible!!
Anyway, this is a great debate! It's like watching Tennis!! ;D
Except that it's a mismatch. I'm Federer he's Sharapova.
If he's talking appearance wise than I must certainly am Sharapova. But your no Federer. Your Venus Williams.
So you're admitting you're a tart? Just as I thought.
And you are admitting to having no personality and a predictable bore. :)
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Is it to late to retract the comment about Tennis :rolleyes: ;D
Please deem it null and void, thank you.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
J da Bomba
Is it to late to retract the comment about Tennis :rolleyes: ;D
Please deem it null and void, thank you.
Don't worry it wont detract from the "serious" debate. It's a comic interlude.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Complete and utter laughable codswollop.
Was Ali a world champion or rated top ten by the Ring when Berbick beat him? Pathetic comparision. Fact.
All of those fighters listed, whatever your ill-informed opinion of them, were ELITE featherweights (regarded amongst the worlds best) when Naz beat them. Not ONE retired after losing to Naz, some going on to win further titles. Fact.
What more can a fighter do than wipe-out all the most decorated fighters in his particular division?
So, here we are again, for the 4th time, tell me an elite featherweight Naz ducked in his time? Because if you can't name one your arguement is totally invalid. Fact.
I now understand the problem. You don't know the meaning of the word elite. That's become obvious. You think just cuz a fighter held a title than he was elite. So I'm thinking you must of considered Gavin Rees an elite fighter when he was holding his strap, right? It don't work that way. My opinion is my opinion. But assuming people know the true meaning of the word elite it's pretty much universally known that Paul Ingle, Steve Robinson, Cesar Soto and to a point Manuel Medina were never elite fighters even in there primes. That's a fact. The others were elite at one point in there careers. But they were all pretty much shot fighters when Hamed fought them. Tell me what other championship did Tom Johnson win after Hamed? Kevin Kelley. What title he pick up. None to both. As well as to Wilfredo Vazquez and Vuyani Bungu. So what were these other championships these guys won after Hamed that you lied about? There isn't any. None of them did nothing that meant anything after Hamed. Cuz they were all shot fighters when they fought Hamed. Fact.
You don't think I see through you? Your using word Featherweight as a security blanket. Not no more. I'm tearing it up. Junior Jones, Kennedy Mckinney, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather, Angel Manfredy were elite fighters (Manfredy being the exception) that expressed interest in facing Hamed. Fact. How many of those did he fight? None. Fact. He ducked one after the other. Another fact. They all didn't all share the same weight class as him. But neither did Bungu. And they still fought. But not against the others. Hamed's ducking skills truly were elite.
Yet again an utterly shocking lack of knowledge :vd:
1. Junior Jones and Kennedy Mckinney were elite fighters? They lost to Naz victims (Jones to Ingle and McKinney to Bungu). What makes them any better than the other champions Naz smashed? It is also a FACT that Jones ducked out of the March 11 2000 date that Bungu took (
BBC News | SPORT | Hamed fight called off). We've already established Marquez ducked Naz. Morales lost out to Barrera. Mayweather, Manfredy, Gatti - just about every fighter in the late 90s was linked with Naz because of the MONEY!!! All were operating at bigger weights. There's no evidence that Naz ducked anyone. You are tearing up nothing. Fact.
2. I said SOME went on to win titles (Medina and Ingle). Kelley was deemed good enough to fight both Morales and Barrera after Naz sparked him. I never lie. Fact.
3. You're the one that has the problem understaning the word elite. Did I call anyone anything other than elite in their weight-class? That's a no. Fact.
Junior Jones was past his prime when he fought Paul Ingle though Fenster, his legs were gone and he only just about got past Richard Evatt beforehand. Junior Jones in his prime the one that defeated MAB x2, Orlando Canizalez, John Michael Johnson, Jorge Eliecer Julio. Around that time he was special fighter, its only his chin that let him down and inconsistency.
As for Kennedy McKinney he was just as talented as Junior Jones, he seemed to go down hill pretty quickly i heard it was from drugs. Which is a shame considering how great he looked against Welcome Ncita, MAB, Paul Banke.
I tell you there is one Featherweight Naseem Hamed didn't fight, who i would of loved to have seen him fight and thats Luisito Espinosa. Also a fight with Alejandro Gonzalez would of been entertaining aswell.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Complete and utter laughable codswollop.
Was Ali a world champion or rated top ten by the Ring when Berbick beat him? Pathetic comparision. Fact.
All of those fighters listed, whatever your ill-informed opinion of them, were ELITE featherweights (regarded amongst the worlds best) when Naz beat them. Not ONE retired after losing to Naz, some going on to win further titles. Fact.
What more can a fighter do than wipe-out all the most decorated fighters in his particular division?
So, here we are again, for the 4th time, tell me an elite featherweight Naz ducked in his time? Because if you can't name one your arguement is totally invalid. Fact.
I now understand the problem. You don't know the meaning of the word elite. That's become obvious. You think just cuz a fighter held a title than he was elite. So I'm thinking you must of considered Gavin Rees an elite fighter when he was holding his strap, right? It don't work that way. My opinion is my opinion. But assuming people know the true meaning of the word elite it's pretty much universally known that Paul Ingle, Steve Robinson, Cesar Soto and to a point Manuel Medina were never elite fighters even in there primes. That's a fact. The others were elite at one point in there careers. But they were all pretty much shot fighters when Hamed fought them. Tell me what other championship did Tom Johnson win after Hamed? Kevin Kelley. What title he pick up. None to both. As well as to Wilfredo Vazquez and Vuyani Bungu. So what were these other championships these guys won after Hamed that you lied about? There isn't any. None of them did nothing that meant anything after Hamed. Cuz they were all shot fighters when they fought Hamed. Fact.
You don't think I see through you? Your using word Featherweight as a security blanket. Not no more. I'm tearing it up. Junior Jones, Kennedy Mckinney, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather, Angel Manfredy were elite fighters (Manfredy being the exception) that expressed interest in facing Hamed. Fact. How many of those did he fight? None. Fact. He ducked one after the other. Another fact. They all didn't all share the same weight class as him. But neither did Bungu. And they still fought. But not against the others. Hamed's ducking skills truly were elite.
Yet again an utterly shocking lack of knowledge :vd:
1. Junior Jones and Kennedy Mckinney were elite fighters? They lost to Naz victims (Jones to Ingle and McKinney to Bungu). What makes them any better than the other champions Naz smashed? It is also a FACT that Jones ducked out of the March 11 2000 date that Bungu took (
BBC News | SPORT | Hamed fight called off). We've already established Marquez ducked Naz. Morales lost out to Barrera. Mayweather, Manfredy, Gatti - just about every fighter in the late 90s was linked with Naz because of the MONEY!!! All were operating at bigger weights. There's no evidence that Naz ducked anyone. You are tearing up nothing. Fact.
2. I said SOME went on to win titles (Medina and Ingle). Kelley was deemed good enough to fight both Morales and Barrera after Naz sparked him. I never lie. Fact.
3. You're the one that has the problem understaning the word elite. Did I call anyone anything other than elite in their weight-class? That's a no. Fact.
Junior Jones was past his prime when he fought Paul Ingle though Fenster, his legs were gone and he only just about got past Richard Evatt beforehand. Junior Jones in his prime the one that defeated MAB x2, Orlando Canizalez, John Michael Johnson, Jorge Eliecer Julio. Around that time he was special fighter, its only his chin that let him down and inconsistency.
As for Kennedy McKinney he was just as talented as Junior Jones, he seemed to go down hill pretty quickly i heard it was from drugs. Which is a shame considering how great he looked against Welcome Ncita, MAB, Paul Banke.
I tell you there is one Featherweight Naseem Hamed didn't fight, who i would of loved to have seen him fight and thats Luisito Espinosa. Also a fight with Alejandro Gonzalez would of been entertaining aswell.
Yeah yeah, you don't have to tell me he was past his best, I saw all those fights live.
Jones was KO'd by McKinney on the Naz-Kelley undercard. McKinney was done by Espinosa. Espinosa lost to Soto. Gonzalez lost to Medina.
All these guys LOST during Naz's pomp to his VICTIMS. So none can be called "elite" using VD's argument.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
I remember we had an old thread here on what the definition of "elite" was. My opinion of elite meant hall of famer. Nas in my opinion was in the class of guys like Meldrick Taylor, Junior Jones, Zab Judah, Fernando Vargas, Ricky Hatton. Guys that were p4p fighters but not of the truly elite class like an De La Hoya, Chavez, Mayweather, Pacquiao, MAB, and yes JMM.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
I remember we had an old thread here on what the definition of "elite" was. My opinion of elite meant hall of famer. Nas in my opinion was in the class of guys like Meldrick Taylor, Junior Jones, Zab Judah, Fernando Vargas, Ricky Hatton. Guys that were p4p fighters but not of the truly elite class like an De La Hoya, Chavez, Mayweather, Pacquiao, MAB, and yes JMM.
I basically agree with that.
Except ALL of those fighters were elite in their time. What seperates the second list is they are all-time greats.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Complete and utter laughable codswollop.
Was Ali a world champion or rated top ten by the Ring when Berbick beat him? Pathetic comparision. Fact.
All of those fighters listed, whatever your ill-informed opinion of them, were ELITE featherweights (regarded amongst the worlds best) when Naz beat them. Not ONE retired after losing to Naz, some going on to win further titles. Fact.
What more can a fighter do than wipe-out all the most decorated fighters in his particular division?
So, here we are again, for the 4th time, tell me an elite featherweight Naz ducked in his time? Because if you can't name one your arguement is totally invalid. Fact.
I now understand the problem. You don't know the meaning of the word elite. That's become obvious. You think just cuz a fighter held a title than he was elite. So I'm thinking you must of considered Gavin Rees an elite fighter when he was holding his strap, right? It don't work that way. My opinion is my opinion. But assuming people know the true meaning of the word elite it's pretty much universally known that Paul Ingle, Steve Robinson, Cesar Soto and to a point Manuel Medina were never elite fighters even in there primes. That's a fact. The others were elite at one point in there careers. But they were all pretty much shot fighters when Hamed fought them. Tell me what other championship did Tom Johnson win after Hamed? Kevin Kelley. What title he pick up. None to both. As well as to Wilfredo Vazquez and Vuyani Bungu. So what were these other championships these guys won after Hamed that you lied about? There isn't any. None of them did nothing that meant anything after Hamed. Cuz they were all shot fighters when they fought Hamed. Fact.
You don't think I see through you? Your using word Featherweight as a security blanket. Not no more. I'm tearing it up. Junior Jones, Kennedy Mckinney, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather, Angel Manfredy were elite fighters (Manfredy being the exception) that expressed interest in facing Hamed. Fact. How many of those did he fight? None. Fact. He ducked one after the other. Another fact. They all didn't all share the same weight class as him. But neither did Bungu. And they still fought. But not against the others. Hamed's ducking skills truly were elite.
Yet again an utterly shocking lack of knowledge :vd:
1. Junior Jones and Kennedy Mckinney were elite fighters? They lost to Naz victims (Jones to Ingle and McKinney to Bungu). What makes them any better than the other champions Naz smashed? It is also a FACT that Jones ducked out of the March 11 2000 date that Bungu took (
BBC News | SPORT | Hamed fight called off). We've already established Marquez ducked Naz. Morales lost out to Barrera. Mayweather, Manfredy, Gatti - just about every fighter in the late 90s was linked with Naz because of the MONEY!!! All were operating at bigger weights. There's no evidence that Naz ducked anyone. You are tearing up nothing. Fact.
2. I said SOME went on to win titles (Medina and Ingle). Kelley was deemed good enough to fight both Morales and Barrera after Naz sparked him. I never lie. Fact.
3. You're the one that has the problem understaning the word elite. Did I call anyone anything other than elite in their weight-class? That's a no. Fact.
Junior Jones was past his prime when he fought Paul Ingle though Fenster, his legs were gone and he only just about got past Richard Evatt beforehand. Junior Jones in his prime the one that defeated MAB x2, Orlando Canizalez, John Michael Johnson, Jorge Eliecer Julio. Around that time he was special fighter, its only his chin that let him down and inconsistency.
As for Kennedy McKinney he was just as talented as Junior Jones, he seemed to go down hill pretty quickly i heard it was from drugs. Which is a shame considering how great he looked against Welcome Ncita, MAB, Paul Banke.
I tell you there is one Featherweight Naseem Hamed didn't fight, who i would of loved to have seen him fight and thats Luisito Espinosa. Also a fight with Alejandro Gonzalez would of been entertaining aswell.
Yeah yeah, you don't have to tell me he was past his best, I saw all those fights live.
Jones was KO'd by McKinney on the Naz-Kelley undercard. McKinney was done by Espinosa. Espinosa lost to Soto. Gonzalez lost to Medina.
All these guys LOST during Naz's pomp to his VICTIMS. So none can be called "elite" using VD's argument.
Well i don't know all the history considering i was young, but im pretty sure Luisito Espinosa vs Naseem Hamed could of happened at some point. Luisito Espinosa had a nice little run at Featherweight, destroying two highly regarded fighters in Kennedy McKinney, Alejando Gonzalez.
Also the two wins over Manuel Medina, Naseem Hamed chose to fight Manuel Medina rather than Luisito Espinosa.
I've seen quite a few Luisito Espinosa fights, and he was pretty good at one point. With a hell of a left hook, he would of been dangerous fight for Naseem Hamed.
Had the fight of taken place between 1995-1998.
Im not saying anyone avoided anyone, you asked an elite Featherweight Naseem Hamed could of fought. And he could of fought Luisito Espinosa between 1995-1998.
-
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ICB
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Violent Demise
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Complete and utter laughable codswollop.
Was Ali a world champion or rated top ten by the Ring when Berbick beat him? Pathetic comparision. Fact.
All of those fighters listed, whatever your ill-informed opinion of them, were ELITE featherweights (regarded amongst the worlds best) when Naz beat them. Not ONE retired after losing to Naz, some going on to win further titles. Fact.
What more can a fighter do than wipe-out all the most decorated fighters in his particular division?
So, here we are again, for the 4th time, tell me an elite featherweight Naz ducked in his time? Because if you can't name one your arguement is totally invalid. Fact.
I now understand the problem. You don't know the meaning of the word elite. That's become obvious. You think just cuz a fighter held a title than he was elite. So I'm thinking you must of considered Gavin Rees an elite fighter when he was holding his strap, right? It don't work that way. My opinion is my opinion. But assuming people know the true meaning of the word elite it's pretty much universally known that Paul Ingle, Steve Robinson, Cesar Soto and to a point Manuel Medina were never elite fighters even in there primes. That's a fact. The others were elite at one point in there careers. But they were all pretty much shot fighters when Hamed fought them. Tell me what other championship did Tom Johnson win after Hamed? Kevin Kelley. What title he pick up. None to both. As well as to Wilfredo Vazquez and Vuyani Bungu. So what were these other championships these guys won after Hamed that you lied about? There isn't any. None of them did nothing that meant anything after Hamed. Cuz they were all shot fighters when they fought Hamed. Fact.
You don't think I see through you? Your using word Featherweight as a security blanket. Not no more. I'm tearing it up. Junior Jones, Kennedy Mckinney, Erik Morales, Juan Manuel Marquez, Floyd Mayweather, Angel Manfredy were elite fighters (Manfredy being the exception) that expressed interest in facing Hamed. Fact. How many of those did he fight? None. Fact. He ducked one after the other. Another fact. They all didn't all share the same weight class as him. But neither did Bungu. And they still fought. But not against the others. Hamed's ducking skills truly were elite.
Yet again an utterly shocking lack of knowledge :vd:
1. Junior Jones and Kennedy Mckinney were elite fighters? They lost to Naz victims (Jones to Ingle and McKinney to Bungu). What makes them any better than the other champions Naz smashed? It is also a FACT that Jones ducked out of the March 11 2000 date that Bungu took (
BBC News | SPORT | Hamed fight called off). We've already established Marquez ducked Naz. Morales lost out to Barrera. Mayweather, Manfredy, Gatti - just about every fighter in the late 90s was linked with Naz because of the MONEY!!! All were operating at bigger weights. There's no evidence that Naz ducked anyone. You are tearing up nothing. Fact.
2. I said SOME went on to win titles (Medina and Ingle). Kelley was deemed good enough to fight both Morales and Barrera after Naz sparked him. I never lie. Fact.
3. You're the one that has the problem understaning the word elite. Did I call anyone anything other than elite in their weight-class? That's a no. Fact.
Junior Jones was past his prime when he fought Paul Ingle though Fenster, his legs were gone and he only just about got past Richard Evatt beforehand. Junior Jones in his prime the one that defeated MAB x2, Orlando Canizalez, John Michael Johnson, Jorge Eliecer Julio. Around that time he was special fighter, its only his chin that let him down and inconsistency.
As for Kennedy McKinney he was just as talented as Junior Jones, he seemed to go down hill pretty quickly i heard it was from drugs. Which is a shame considering how great he looked against Welcome Ncita, MAB, Paul Banke.
I tell you there is one Featherweight Naseem Hamed didn't fight, who i would of loved to have seen him fight and thats Luisito Espinosa. Also a fight with Alejandro Gonzalez would of been entertaining aswell.
Yeah yeah, you don't have to tell me he was past his best, I saw all those fights live.
Jones was KO'd by McKinney on the Naz-Kelley undercard. McKinney was done by Espinosa. Espinosa lost to Soto. Gonzalez lost to Medina.
All these guys LOST during Naz's pomp to his VICTIMS. So none can be called "elite" using VD's argument.
Well i don't know all the history considering i was young, but im pretty sure Luisito Espinosa vs Naseem Hamed could of happened at some point. Luisito Espinosa had a nice little run at Featherweight, destroying two highly regarded fighters in Kennedy McKinney, Alejando Gonzalez.
Also the two wins over Manuel Medina, Naseem Hamed chose to fight Manuel Medina rather than Luisito Espinosa.
I've seen quite a few Luisito Espinosa fights, and he was pretty good at one point. With a hell of a left hook, he would of been dangerous fight for Naseem Hamed.
Had the fight of taken place between 1995-1998.
Im not saying anyone avoided anyone, you asked an elite Featherweight Naseem Hamed could of fought. And he could of fought Luisito Espinosa between 1995-1998.
Espinosa could have got a fight with Naz if he hadn't lost his mandatory to Soto in 1999. Obviously Naz fought the winner. During 95 and 98 Naz beat Johnson, Kelley and Vazquez. Is Espinosa rated any higher than those fighters?
Naz would get no credit for beating Espinosa - using VD's argument.
