OR whAT ABOUT PACMAN VS HAMED how would that have been?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brucelee

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonesJrMayweather+Mosley

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatdane

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JT Rock

2 very exciting offensive fighters, that are wide open and have defense pretty low on their priority list in the ring... Lets just say this isin't goint to the judges

Hard to say... Naz had devestating power and cat like reflexes, Pac is reminescent of the Tazmanian Devil just a nonstop pressure punching whirlwind..... definetly would be a FOTY candidate

---

no its really not hard to say..

against who did naz have catlike reflexes, against the one and only elite guy he fought, or the huys brought in, to make him look good..??we all know the answer to that one..

the difference is, that while naz looked powerfull and quick against b-level opponents, pac has done it against simply the best..

---

kevin kelley was more than b-rated

---

Kelley is b-rated. he was knocked out by Espinosa who was b-rated.

---

Who are you talking about? certainly not Flushing flash

Hammed was nothing more than a gimmick with a big A$$ mouth. Pacman would apply so much pressure to him, Nas probably would $hit his trunks. It wouldn't even be close, Pacman would Fuk him up.

Kevin Kelley manged to deck prince a number of times because of Balance problems, i think that pac's southpaw style and additional would result in prince being on the canvas more often and losing a wide UD due to 10-8 rds.

Wonder what hindsight says now???;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonesJrMayweather

Wonder what hindsight says now???;D

---

Not much because the Featherweight version of Manny Pacquiao, was still very raw.

Pac would have battered Naz silly.

FACT

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smashup

Pac would have battered Naz silly.

FACT

---

Your thinking way too much about the new and improved Manny Pacquiao, the Manny Pacquiao at Featherweight isn't the same animal. Although he was still very dangerous.

He was a raw brawling fighter, who always come forward. And he was pretty one dimensional, i wouldn't be shocked with Naseem Hamed's power if he upset Manny Pacquiao.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smashup

Pac would have battered Naz silly.

FACT

---

Your thinking way too much about the new and improved Manny Pacquiao, the Manny Pacquiao at Featherweight isn't the same animal. Although he was still very dangerous.

He was a raw brawling fighter, who always come forward. And he was pretty one dimensional, i wouldn't be shocked with Naseem Hamed's power if he upset Manny Pacquiao.

---

I think the only way Naz could possibly have upset him would be by blowing off during the stare down;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smashup

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smashup

Pac would have battered Naz silly.

FACT

---

Your thinking way too much about the new and improved Manny Pacquiao, the Manny Pacquiao at Featherweight isn't the same animal. Although he was still very dangerous.

He was a raw brawling fighter, who always come forward. And he was pretty one dimensional, i wouldn't be shocked with Naseem Hamed's power if he upset Manny Pacquiao.

---

I think the only way Naz could possibly have upset him would be by blowing off during the stare down;)

---

I just think the Manny Pacquiao at Featherweight is beatable, he was one dimensional. And he never boxed on the backfoot, he always come forward. And he was very hittable aswell.

I really think that could spell disaster for Manny Pacquiao, because Naseem Hamed has unreal power. I mean only two men went the distance with him during his title reign, and they were the normally very durable Cesar Soto, and granite chinned Wayne McCullough.

Yes Pacquiao was pretty raw at that stage and could be stopped by Hamed, but a few things he had that Hamed never possessed or exhibit in the ring against an ATG, were mental toughness, a willingness to dig deep, and oh yeah something call having heart. The Barrera fight proved that Hamed for all his great physical gifts severely lacked these attributes that pushes a fighter into the upper echelon of all time great.That's why I'm going with Pacquiao for a win if there was a mythical matchup at 126.

And if someone is going to bring up let's say the Kevin Kelly fight to try and say he possessed the intangibles I mentioned, people have to remember Kelly while a good fighter, was not an ATG fighter like a Barrera or a Pacquiao.

Pacman is a great fighter , who lost to morales and bounced back , fighting and beating the best.
Hamed is a protected fighter with huge floors , poor defence , yes he has power , but that sit , Pacman is to fast for him and stops him inside 5.

Now this is an old thread and was before Pac was the superstar he is now but even then I would have gone for Pac to beat Hamed to a pulp. He is just a different league IMO. The only other great fighter Hamed fought who was still of reasonable age was Barrera and he got battered in that one. Pac would KO him.

ICB spot on.

The featherweight version of Pac is not the awesome fighting machine of now. He was just a straight left hand (albeit a lightning fast killer left hand). He wouldn't have made it out of three rounds with Naz.

Whoomp there it is!

Naz KO 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Yes Pacquiao was pretty raw at that stage and could be stopped by Hamed, but a few things he had that Hamed never possessed or exhibit in the ring against an ATG, were mental toughness, a willingness to dig deep, and oh yeah something call having heart. The Barrera fight proved that Hamed for all his great physical gifts severely lacked these attributes that pushes a fighter into the upper echelon of all time great.That's why I'm going with Pacquiao for a win if there was a mythical matchup at 126.

And if someone is going to bring up let's say the Kevin Kelly fight to try and say he possessed the intangibles I mentioned, people have to remember Kelly while a good fighter, was not an ATG fighter like a Barrera or a Pacquiao.

---

Naseem Hamed showed heart vs Manuel Medina, Paul Ingle. Both fights were very tough and he prevailed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Yes Pacquiao was pretty raw at that stage and could be stopped by Hamed, but a few things he had that Hamed never possessed or exhibit in the ring against an ATG, were mental toughness, a willingness to dig deep, and oh yeah something call having heart. The Barrera fight proved that Hamed for all his great physical gifts severely lacked these attributes that pushes a fighter into the upper echelon of all time great.That's why I'm going with Pacquiao for a win if there was a mythical matchup at 126.

And if someone is going to bring up let's say the Kevin Kelly fight to try and say he possessed the intangibles I mentioned, people have to remember Kelly while a good fighter, was not an ATG fighter like a Barrera or a Pacquiao.

---

Naseem Hamed showed heart vs Manuel Medina, Paul Ingle. Both fights were very tough and he prevailed.

---

Medina and INgle are not Barrera and Pacquiao, those 2 are leagues ahead of them in talent and intangibles. Coming back against Medina and Ingle is one thing, doing it against ATG fighters is another.

The reality of the matter is that Hamed did not show the intangibles I mentioned in the Barrera fight. He didn't show he had heart, mental toughness, a willingness to gut it out, in a tought fight against an All time great fighter.

Every once in a while, there is a thread about how Hamed would do against a Pacquiao, Morales, JMM, etc. Hamed looked great fighting against the likes of Kevin Kelly, Wayne McCullough, Steve Robinson, etc. But guys like Pacquiao, Barrera, Morales, JMM are not those kind of fighters Hamed is used to fighting. They are a whole different league in terms of talent and mindset.

At Featherweight it's a 50/50 fight that doesn't go past 6 rounds imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Yes Pacquiao was pretty raw at that stage and could be stopped by Hamed, but a few things he had that Hamed never possessed or exhibit in the ring against an ATG, were mental toughness, a willingness to dig deep, and oh yeah something call having heart. The Barrera fight proved that Hamed for all his great physical gifts severely lacked these attributes that pushes a fighter into the upper echelon of all time great.That's why I'm going with Pacquiao for a win if there was a mythical matchup at 126.

And if someone is going to bring up let's say the Kevin Kelly fight to try and say he possessed the intangibles I mentioned, people have to remember Kelly while a good fighter, was not an ATG fighter like a Barrera or a Pacquiao.

---

Naseem Hamed showed heart vs Manuel Medina, Paul Ingle. Both fights were very tough and he prevailed.

---

Medina and INgle are not Barrera and Pacquiao, those 2 are leagues ahead of them in talent and intangibles. Coming back against Medina and Ingle is one thing, doing it against ATG fighters is another.

The reality of the matter is that Hamed did not show the intangibles I mentioned in the Barrera fight. He didn't show he had heart, mental toughness, a willingness to gut it out, in a tought fight against an All time great fighter.

Every once in a while, there is a thread about how Hamed would do against a Pacquiao, Morales, JMM, etc. Hamed looked great fighting against the likes of Kevin Kelly, Wayne McCullough, Steve Robinson, etc. But guys like Pacquiao, Barrera, Morales, JMM are not those kind of fighters Hamed is used to fighting. They are a whole different league in terms of talent and mindset.

---

Naz getting outboxed by Barrera shows he didn't have heart? That's a harsh way to judge fighters. Bascially any fighter that gets soundly beaten doesn't have heart, mental toughness or a willingness to fight it out.

I guess Barrera showed he doesn't have heart, mental toughness or a willingness to fight it out in the Pac fights?

Maybe Naz lost because Barrera simply fought a better fight than him ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO

Naz had a good chin for sure he only had flash knockdowns against him and some he was off balance he had to take big full blooded shots off Barrera i think Naz could stop the Pacman i think sometimes Naz's power gets underrated

---

Naz can't lose to anyone in your eyes ;D how about Tyson vs Naz how would that have gone ;)


Regarding this fight well i might agree that Naz could win because Pacs come forward pressure style could be disaster for Pac.

---

OK, 2001= MAB won against Naz,
after 2 years, 2003= MP KO'd MAB (lopsided)

You be the judge...;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jolz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TYSONBRUNO

Naz had a good chin for sure he only had flash knockdowns against him and some he was off balance he had to take big full blooded shots off Barrera i think Naz could stop the Pacman i think sometimes Naz's power gets underrated

---

Naz can't lose to anyone in your eyes ;D how about Tyson vs Naz how would that have gone ;)


Regarding this fight well i might agree that Naz could win because Pacs come forward pressure style could be disaster for Pac.

---

OK, 2001= MAB won against Naz,
after 2 years, 2003= MP KO'd MAB (lopsided)

You be the judge...;D

---

4 or 5 more fights including a war with Morales between those two dates ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Naseem Hamed showed heart vs Manuel Medina, Paul Ingle. Both fights were very tough and he prevailed.

---

Medina and INgle are not Barrera and Pacquiao, those 2 are leagues ahead of them in talent and intangibles. Coming back against Medina and Ingle is one thing, doing it against ATG fighters is another.

The reality of the matter is that Hamed did not show the intangibles I mentioned in the Barrera fight. He didn't show he had heart, mental toughness, a willingness to gut it out, in a tought fight against an All time great fighter.

Every once in a while, there is a thread about how Hamed would do against a Pacquiao, Morales, JMM, etc. Hamed looked great fighting against the likes of Kevin Kelly, Wayne McCullough, Steve Robinson, etc. But guys like Pacquiao, Barrera, Morales, JMM are not those kind of fighters Hamed is used to fighting. They are a whole different league in terms of talent and mindset.

---

Naz getting outboxed by Barrera shows he didn't have heart? That's a harsh way to judge fighters. Bascially any fighter that gets soundly beaten doesn't have heart, mental toughness or a willingness to fight it out.

I guess Barrera showed he doesn't have heart, mental toughness or a willingness to fight it out in the Pac fights?

Maybe Naz lost because Barrera simply fought a better fight than him ;)

---

I haven't watched the Hamed-Barerra fight in 6 or 7 years but what I remember was that Hamed was trying to resort to dirty tactics out of frustration and then looked like he was mailing it in in the mid to late rounds when it looked like it was a tough fight against an all time great and he couldn't possibly edge it out.

JMM was getting outboxed by Floyd, but it never looked like he was going through the motions and had already given up. Pac was getting outboxed and suffered a cut against Morales in their 1st fight he didn't look to mail it in and go through the motions.

Hamed looked great beating guys like Robinson, Kelly, McCullogh, but how did he look when he finally step it up against a Barrera? Just because Hamed looks great against B+ fighters doesn't mean he beats A-list fighters like a Pac, Barrera, Morales, JMM, etc.

Remember there was a recent Valero thread, where the majority said that Valero easily KOs/beats Pac because Valero looked so great at 135 with a 100% ko ratio in his career? But what people don't realize was that he never beat elite A+ competition (meaning atg or even p4p figthers), so I find it hard to believe he kos pac easily. Same thing I feel here with Hamed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Medina and INgle are not Barrera and Pacquiao, those 2 are leagues ahead of them in talent and intangibles. Coming back against Medina and Ingle is one thing, doing it against ATG fighters is another.

The reality of the matter is that Hamed did not show the intangibles I mentioned in the Barrera fight. He didn't show he had heart, mental toughness, a willingness to gut it out, in a tought fight against an All time great fighter.

Every once in a while, there is a thread about how Hamed would do against a Pacquiao, Morales, JMM, etc. Hamed looked great fighting against the likes of Kevin Kelly, Wayne McCullough, Steve Robinson, etc. But guys like Pacquiao, Barrera, Morales, JMM are not those kind of fighters Hamed is used to fighting. They are a whole different league in terms of talent and mindset.

---

Naz getting outboxed by Barrera shows he didn't have heart? That's a harsh way to judge fighters. Bascially any fighter that gets soundly beaten doesn't have heart, mental toughness or a willingness to fight it out.

I guess Barrera showed he doesn't have heart, mental toughness or a willingness to fight it out in the Pac fights?

Maybe Naz lost because Barrera simply fought a better fight than him ;)

---

I haven't watched the Hamed-Barerra fight in 6 or 7 years but what I remember was that Hamed was trying to resort to dirty tactics out of frustration and then looked like he was mailing it in in the mid to late rounds when it looked like it was a tough fight against an all time great and he couldn't possibly edge it out.

JMM was getting outboxed by Floyd, but it never looked like he was going through the motions and had already given up. Pac was getting outboxed and suffered a cut against Morales in their 1st fight he didn't look to mail it in and go through the motions.

Hamed looked great beating guys like Robinson, Kelly, McCullogh, but how did he look when he finally step it up against a Barrera? Just because Hamed looks great against B+ fighters doesn't mean he beats A-list fighters like a Pac, Barrera, Morales, JMM, etc.

Remember there was a recent Valero thread, where the majority said that Valero easily KOs/beats Pac because Valero looked so great at 135 with a 100% ko ratio in his career? But what people don't realize was that he never beat elite A+ competition (meaning atg or even p4p figthers), so I find it hard to believe he kos pac easily. Same thing I feel here with Hamed.

---

Naz tried to land his KO shots the whole fight. That's where he went wrong. He was arrogant and deluded enough to believe one punch would end the fight. He expected Barrera to come forward allowing him to counter with his bombs, but obviously Barrera was smarter than that and did the virtual opposite.

You can't say he lacked heart for fighting a bad fight, being beaten by a smarter guy on the night or quite simply being beaten by a better fighter.

The real dirty move came from Barrera smashing Hamed's head into the turnbuckle. With hindsight Naz should have feigned serious injury forcing the ref to DQ Barrera - then you could have questioned his heart.

For sure Pac may have smashed him. Just like Naz may have smashed Pac. We'll never know ;)

Hehe this makes me laugh they used MARQUEZ as denominator against Pacquiao, which in contrary Naz even didnt met Marquez who was a champion also on that time.

Simple Naz was schooled and Barrera makes him ashamed and lost the drive in boxing. so we can't see him how he can boxed, schooled or K.Oed in this run by other greats.

If Naz met Marquez, Morales or Luisito Espinosa on that time who was a feather champ on his time and also could bang on that time (late 90's) well i dunno.

but comparin and making Naz really the man, well i dont really can't compare coz he just quit and lose his drive in boxing after he was schooled by Barrera, if he just met another greats like Marquez, Morales or even Espinosa the debate is much easier to make.

Great thread. I am a proud Pinoy Pactard from Daly City, California (Little Manila, USA). That being said, featherweight Hamed beats featherweight Pac. I know it sounds blasphemous to my fellow Pachuggers, but before even before Pac came along, my family and I have been true boxing fans, unlike most upstart boxing fans that only started watching because of Pac. Me and my cousins would set up big fight parties for Hamed fights. We celebrated every fight he had where he knocked someone stupid. We would crack up with every ring entrance. And his Euro/hiphop slang was a hoot. Anyways, the feather Pac was too raw and overly aggressive and left hand happy. He would get countered my Hamed a lot. The only thing against Hamed is that he was a one shot a time guy being that he had great power. I think combos would suit him better against Pac like it did for JMM. We will never know...Just like we will never know Valero vs Pac. Anyone want to weigh in on JMM v Hamed or Morales v Hamed or even PBF v Hamed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Yes Pacquiao was pretty raw at that stage and could be stopped by Hamed, but a few things he had that Hamed never possessed or exhibit in the ring against an ATG, were mental toughness, a willingness to dig deep, and oh yeah something call having heart. The Barrera fight proved that Hamed for all his great physical gifts severely lacked these attributes that pushes a fighter into the upper echelon of all time great.That's why I'm going with Pacquiao for a win if there was a mythical matchup at 126.

And if someone is going to bring up let's say the Kevin Kelly fight to try and say he possessed the intangibles I mentioned, people have to remember Kelly while a good fighter, was not an ATG fighter like a Barrera or a Pacquiao.

---

Naseem Hamed showed heart vs Manuel Medina, Paul Ingle. Both fights were very tough and he prevailed.

---

Both light punchers , both B class fighters , pac wins easily , Hamed was floored by Kevin Kelly , a stylish boxer ,Pac would behead Hamed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Lord Al

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Yes Pacquiao was pretty raw at that stage and could be stopped by Hamed, but a few things he had that Hamed never possessed or exhibit in the ring against an ATG, were mental toughness, a willingness to dig deep, and oh yeah something call having heart. The Barrera fight proved that Hamed for all his great physical gifts severely lacked these attributes that pushes a fighter into the upper echelon of all time great.That's why I'm going with Pacquiao for a win if there was a mythical matchup at 126.

And if someone is going to bring up let's say the Kevin Kelly fight to try and say he possessed the intangibles I mentioned, people have to remember Kelly while a good fighter, was not an ATG fighter like a Barrera or a Pacquiao.

---

Naseem Hamed showed heart vs Manuel Medina, Paul Ingle. Both fights were very tough and he prevailed.

---

Both light punchers , both B class fighters , pac wins easily , Hamed was floored by Kevin Kelly , a stylish boxer ,Pac would behead Hamed.

---

A prime Kevin Kelley is just as fast, and just as dangerous as Manny Pacquiao at Featherweight. I think Kevin Kelley gets seriously underrated. Yes his chin was suspect but he had tons of heart, and could beat anyone at his best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BIG H

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jolz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICB

Naz can't lose to anyone in your eyes ;D how about Tyson vs Naz how would that have gone ;)


Regarding this fight well i might agree that Naz could win because Pacs come forward pressure style could be disaster for Pac.

---

OK, 2001= MAB won against Naz,
after 2 years, 2003= MP KO'd MAB (lopsided)

You be the judge...;D

---

4 or 5 more fights including a war with Morales between those two dates ;)

---

yes, and after the 1st Pacquiao fight, MAB had a string of wins until he lost to Marquez...;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonesJrMayweather

don't know..but i think prince is slick enough to duck and counter, but manny is quick enough to land sometimes too...don't know if PAC could take prince's power though, but naz could take his because prince did have a chin...

---

If Pac fought Naz. Naz would have 2 chances SLIM and NONE ......and SLIM just left town. The fact that Naz retired so early and only had one defeat on his record will make ring historians think he is better than what he was. If anything his power covered up a lot of cracks. I see, Naz as a tennis player with a HUGE serve, such he'll win a lot of matches and tournaments but he'll NEVER be great tennis player, because he doesn't have the all round game.

Pacquiao right now would win because he has made leaps and bounds as a fighter. But if we are talking about Pacquiao from featherweight that was mostly jab jab left hand jab jab left hand and was countered at will by someone like a Juan Manuel Marquez. Pacquiao's style at featherweight is all wrong for a counter puncher, especially a counter puncher with a lot of one shot power. Looking at ICB's avatar of whitaker, the second knockdown where the guy came wailing in only to be countered by whitaker's left hand laying him out, is pretty much the way I see the fight going. Pacquiao would be over aggressive and left hand happy and would be countered and probably knocked out. Slick boxing coutner puncher with one punch KO power is a bad style matchup for Pacquiao at featherweight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

For sure Pac may have smashed him. Just like Naz may have smashed Pac. We'll never know ;)

---

Great one.


I think every post in a thread like this should end like this sentence :)


In a fantasy fight...we will never know. all logic goes to pac at this one because of how they performed in their real fights but hamed also has that legit one punch KO power.

If Tyson-Douglas didnt happened and a poll thread was made on that matchup im sure 100% of votes goes to Tyson. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AirJordanIV

Great thread. I am a proud Pinoy Pactard from Daly City, California (Little Manila, USA). That being said, featherweight Hamed beats featherweight Pac. I know it sounds blasphemous to my fellow Pachuggers, but before even before Pac came along, my family and I have been true boxing fans, unlike most upstart boxing fans that only started watching because of Pac. Me and my cousins would set up big fight parties for Hamed fights. We celebrated every fight he had where he knocked someone stupid. We would crack up with every ring entrance. And his Euro/hiphop slang was a hoot. Anyways, the feather Pac was too raw and overly aggressive and left hand happy. He would get countered my Hamed a lot. The only thing against Hamed is that he was a one shot a time guy being that he had great power. I think combos would suit him better against Pac like it did for JMM. We will never know...Just like we will never know Valero vs Pac. Anyone want to weigh in on JMM v Hamed or Morales v Hamed or even PBF v Hamed?

---

Wow Congrats on that. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pacstraightleft

Naz is a arrogant, cocky, and slacker.

He got floored by Kelley.

He got bitchslapped by Barrera.

And ofcourse we all know what Pac did to a past it Barrera.

I hated is damn corny half hour ring entrances.

---

just fixed your post....

anyway, at feather or super feather Naz would have destroyed pac very easily (look what morales did to him), at light weight or above i'd expect pac to win.....

--Years Ago--
If they fought back when Naz was on his prime, I would give Naz the edge considering how Pac only had a jab-jab-straight left attack and that was all he had while Naz had some tricks in his pocket plus punching power. He would be catching Pac coming in all the time until getting him KOed or a desicion with a blood-covered bruised face.

--Present Time--
Let's suppose Naz was still fighting, in shape, etc. I would give Pac the edge considering how he has matured/improved in many areas such as defense, angles, etc. (with or without PEDs).

Quote:

---

Great thread. I am a proud Pinoy Pactard from Daly City, California (Little Manila, USA). That being said, featherweight Hamed beats featherweight Pac. I know it sounds blasphemous to my fellow Pachuggers, but before even before Pac came along, my family and I have been true boxing fans

---

A Filipino daring himself to say something that not praises Pac, cool. A Filipino that watched boxing way before Pac came to the picture and enjoys boxing outside of Pac as well, nice.

Thanks for the love folks. All my Pinoy homies are fuckin' experts in boxing all of a sudden. But they couldn't tell you shit about Sal Sanchez or Alexis Arguello, Carbajal, Duran etc. But they'll show you the last Pac singing performance on their Blackberry with the quickness. Ughh! Mad annoying, yo! These are my coworkers, cousins, uncles, whoever! These mf's couldn't tell you shit about the Ledwabah fight. Couldn't tell you shit about Angulo v Julio or Martinez v Pavlik, but they'll tell you their 1 millionth reason why Floyd is ducking. Get over it. Yeah I'm hatin. Lot of venting here but don't worry folks...I'm still a Pachugger.

Thought I'd bring this thread from the dead in light of the recent knockout.

plus this: http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...roof-fact.html

Funny how Naz's name keeps getting dredged up every now and then.
Poor guy can't enjoy his fat retirement in peace.

;D

Never liked Hamed. Thought him a right dickhead. Welter punching power and legs on a 126 frame and a style that Manny would be perplexed by. At 126 Hamed stops him imo.