Justice!!! Naz goes into Hall of Fame. Fact.

Good on him for getting in,had fun watching him,he got away with some outrageous moves.

Whats the implication on who was the best fighter he fought? It was Mab.

Soto was no bum. There are others who were gifted fighters with long careers,loosened a fair few peoples bolts for good, ruined some fighters on the spot.

People seem to take offense when a fighter does it not sticking to traditional boxing, aside from the big mouth,disrespect of other fighters and the religious stuff.

Wish JMM had fought him back in the day,think he wanted to be the king of Mexico instead though and didnt want to be derailed on his aim at pulling the crowns off Mab and Morrales back then by some hard hitting outsider from Britain. Could of ended everything before it begun :-\.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamGB

Fenster's unable to tell me the best fighter Hamed beat, would anybody else like to?

---

I'd put guys like McCullough, Vasquez, Johnson, Kelley, Soto, Medina, Ingle all in the same pot and say take your pick. I think people look at that pot of fighters and say (obligation comes into it a fair bit) world rated operators who were past, current or future World champions or you say they were all mediocre.


By my own definition they were all World class fighters.


For what it's worth, and this doesn't really add or detract from Naz's standing, the gloss had already come off when he beat them all.

Delighted for the guy. My all-time favorite boxer.

Hopefully this will stop Fenster taking this any further.

You're right Fenster, being 9 means that he had no impact on me at all. Had I been old enough to be aware of him then who knows how all of the hype and excitement would have tainted my views.

I didn't get caught up in the hype like you 'was'.

All that gets left once the hype dies is the substance.

I'd agree with your list Memphis, but there's nobody of the Morales/Barrera/Marquez calibre, no elite fighter at their peak... A decent handful of decent fighters, even world level fighters do not make for more than a good career (which Hamed had, don't get me wrong). Not enough for me to call him one of the greatest.

In terms of career, I'd put him about level with Ricky Hatton. Some seem to think he was the eras answer Pacquiao or Mayweather :vd:

Hall of FAME!!!

Not Hall of Greatest Fighters of All Time.

Wow...
Mind = blown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthless rocco

Hall of FAME!!!

Not Hall of Greatest Fighters of All Time.

---

Yep deserves to be there 100%.

Adam, he clearly had an impact on you at some point in your young life. He was in his pomp before you had pubes. You have a strong opinion about him.

I don't know anyone that ever claimed Naz was as "great" as the fighters you've named in that post - Manny, Floyd, Barrera, Marquez, Morales and Hatton. But what do they have in common? They'll all be sitting alongside Naz in the Hall of Fame when eligible. Good company.

To quote the late Glyn Leach (Boxing Monthly editor) - "To define Hamed with cold statistics would be failing to understand the phenomenon. Without question, the Prince was the most exciting fighter of his era, an unorthodox power-puncher with natural talent to burn. His ring entrances were more WWE than Shawn Michaels himself and his fights were must-see events."

Don't forget Barry McGuigan!

Some non traditionalist fighters can also help the fight along by making strict traditionalist fighters start to question their foundations when hitting air and getting tagged hard from weird angles. Most take offense at that and the questions and emotions felt stop them from adapting.
As a man of higher education and an elite fighter, I think Mab chilled in front of the screen and studied exactly what he was getting into and stayed grounded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

So you was 9, Adam. Which makes you around 16 when Naz retired? Nice. What an impact he had on you.

Steve Robinson beat Colin McMillan (ask Scrap about him he was his trainer), Paul Hodkinson (former WBC champ), Duke McKenzie (three division "world" champ) and Freddy Cruz (former "world" title challenger) during his eight fight unbeaten streak as WBO champ.

I thought Robinson was a very good fighter at the time, that had beaten good fighters.

What did you think of him at the time?

---

Jesus I feel old I was 24 when Hamed beat Robinson.

How old was you when Ali beat Liston? You can't tell Bill Paxton that he's full of shite unless you were 16+

If you're going to claim a fighter from a certain era was more hype than substance then you at least need to back that up by having some knowledge about his opponents. If you claim the fighter wasn't much cop then what does that say about his opponents? And his opponents opponents? And the "great" fighters from that era that have shared common opponents.

You can be the greatest of your era without beating a "great" fighter. Wlad hasn't beat a single man that will go close to being regarded as "great" (HOF bound) but he himself will be regarded as an all-time great. The best heavyweight of his era (one of numerous examples).

Kirkland Laing was beat a dozen times (KO'd eight), never won a "world" title. Who was his best win? Roberto Duran - a man that is regarded by every credible boxing sage on the planet as one the greatest that ever lived. Does that make Laing an all-time great? No.

(although I personally thought he was the bollocks back in the day :rasta:)

Naz had skills, drawing power, and personality. But the way he ended his career leaves a lot to be desired. The first time he's owned, he folds up his tent and goes home. Love him or hate him, those are undeniable..... what would you call them...... facts?

Whether or not this warrants entry into the HOF, is all a matter of opinion. Certainly there are guys in there that are not deserving... just like there's probably omissions that are deserving. Not a perfect process by any stretch.