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
Violent Demise
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
I've just realized something. I was looking at the old Ring Magazine ratings when Hamed was fighting, meaning '90s era. Hamed never once beat a top 10 p4p fighter of his era.
And I'm talking about beating someone who was currently ranked, I'm not talking about someone that fell off the rankings. I could be wrong on this, if so point out to me who he beat that was top 10 p4p at that time.
Hamed was a very good and very exciting fighter, but in my opinion was never elite.
I believe Naz himself was the only P4P featherweight in the late 90s.
You can only meet P4P fighters if they are of similar size/weight to you. I think you will find plenty of fighters become "elite" without beating a fellow P4P incumbent - Hopkins, Lopez etc...
Good point on that, but when Nas dd meet someone who was p4p that was his own size, the outcome was a massive beat down by a guy jumping up in weight.
I've been pretty much tryng to stay out of his debate between you and VD, but I have to agree with him, that Nas never beat any one that was elite and when he did meet someone that was elite it was 1 sided.
I don't see him beating either JMM or Morales at 126.
I've never once said Naz beat an elite fighter - as in a P4P star or an all-time great. I've simply stated he beat the "elite featherweights" (top rated, most decorated) of his time. I've never once called Naz a "great" during this thread.
Greats like Morales never went to featherweight until the end of Naz's era. And Naz basically had to chose between Barrera and Morales at that time. Maybe it wouldn't have mattered by then ;)
Of course you didn't. I'm a give you a little credit. It was a good try. And I can see your little trick working against others. But I saw right through it. I let it play out a little before I wrecked it.
It's like this. Naseem never beat an elite fighter who was in his prime. Thats an indisputable fact. Not even his most loyal can offer an argument without looking like fools. It's why you kept using the word Featherweight. Like I said security blanket. You threw out names under that banner to try and make your point. But eventually you knew it was only a matter of time before I grew bored of you and just put you out your misery. You prepared for it. After making it clear to everybody not brain dead that Robinson, Ingle and Medina were not elite fighters and it's true in fact what Violent D says, you don't get hit to hard. All you had to say is what you just said.
"I uh, uh never said Hamed beat an elite fighter. I said he beat an elite Featherweight. Featherweight. Only talking about that weight"
I'm a cut you some slack and not ask you to explain the shameful ducking of the original question that was asked of you. Ask you can see it's quite clear not the one you were answering.
You haven't wrecked a thing. Anyone with half a brain cell can see I bounce you all over the shop.
The fact is - Naz beat all the elite/best featherweights of his day and ducked nobody.
The end.
To bad the good ones were all past there prime. And the ones that were, weren't that good. Fact.
Another fact is Hamed never beat an elite fighter in his prime.
Prime is debatable.
The only bombproof unquestionable fact is - Naz beat all the elite/best most decorated featherweights of his day and ducked nobody. Fact.
Whoomp there it is
Yeah ok. Going by your analogy and the fact that he beat O'Neil Bell, Wayne Braithwaite, Dale Brown and Virgil Hill (the "elite" Cruiserweights at that time) Hamed's legacy is pretty much the same as that of Jean Marc Mormeck. :lolhaha: And that's a fact
Game. Set. Match. Point
An utterly foolish comparison.
Mormeck never reigned unbeaten with all the pieces intact. He was also KO'd twice. It took an all-time great to disable Naz.
Whoomp there it is
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
"Disable" being the operative word here.
:)
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
Violent Demise
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
I've just realized something. I was looking at the old Ring Magazine ratings when Hamed was fighting, meaning '90s era. Hamed never once beat a top 10 p4p fighter of his era.
And I'm talking about beating someone who was currently ranked, I'm not talking about someone that fell off the rankings. I could be wrong on this, if so point out to me who he beat that was top 10 p4p at that time.
Hamed was a very good and very exciting fighter, but in my opinion was never elite.
I believe Naz himself was the only P4P featherweight in the late 90s.
You can only meet P4P fighters if they are of similar size/weight to you. I think you will find plenty of fighters become "elite" without beating a fellow P4P incumbent - Hopkins, Lopez etc...
Good point on that, but when Nas dd meet someone who was p4p that was his own size, the outcome was a massive beat down by a guy jumping up in weight.
I've been pretty much tryng to stay out of his debate between you and VD, but I have to agree with him, that Nas never beat any one that was elite and when he did meet someone that was elite it was 1 sided.
I don't see him beating either JMM or Morales at 126.
I've never once said Naz beat an elite fighter - as in a P4P star or an all-time great. I've simply stated he beat the "elite featherweights" (top rated, most decorated) of his time. I've never once called Naz a "great" during this thread.
Greats like Morales never went to featherweight until the end of Naz's era. And Naz basically had to chose between Barrera and Morales at that time. Maybe it wouldn't have mattered by then ;)
Of course you didn't. I'm a give you a little credit. It was a good try. And I can see your little trick working against others. But I saw right through it. I let it play out a little before I wrecked it.
It's like this. Naseem never beat an elite fighter who was in his prime. Thats an indisputable fact. Not even his most loyal can offer an argument without looking like fools. It's why you kept using the word Featherweight. Like I said security blanket. You threw out names under that banner to try and make your point. But eventually you knew it was only a matter of time before I grew bored of you and just put you out your misery. You prepared for it. After making it clear to everybody not brain dead that Robinson, Ingle and Medina were not elite fighters and it's true in fact what Violent D says, you don't get hit to hard. All you had to say is what you just said.
"I uh, uh never said Hamed beat an elite fighter. I said he beat an elite Featherweight. Featherweight. Only talking about that weight"
I'm a cut you some slack and not ask you to explain the shameful ducking of the original question that was asked of you. Ask you can see it's quite clear not the one you were answering.
You haven't wrecked a thing. Anyone with half a brain cell can see I bounce you all over the shop.
The fact is - Naz beat all the elite/best featherweights of his day and ducked nobody.
The end.
To bad the good ones were all past there prime. And the ones that were, weren't that good. Fact.
Another fact is Hamed never beat an elite fighter in his prime.
Prime is debatable.
The only bombproof unquestionable fact is - Naz beat all the elite/best most decorated featherweights of his day and ducked nobody. Fact.
Whoomp there it is
Yeah ok. Going by your analogy and the fact that he beat O'Neil Bell, Wayne Braithwaite, Dale Brown and Virgil Hill (the "elite" Cruiserweights at that time) Hamed's legacy is pretty much the same as that of Jean Marc Mormeck. :lolhaha: And that's a fact
Game. Set. Match. Point
An utterly foolish comparison.
Mormeck never reigned unbeaten with all the pieces intact. He was also KO'd twice.
It took an all-time great to disable Naz.
Whoomp there it is
The only All Time Great he ever faced.
Damn! You got knocked the fuck out
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
Violent Demise
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
generalbulldog
I've just realized something. I was looking at the old Ring Magazine ratings when Hamed was fighting, meaning '90s era. Hamed never once beat a top 10 p4p fighter of his era.
And I'm talking about beating someone who was currently ranked, I'm not talking about someone that fell off the rankings. I could be wrong on this, if so point out to me who he beat that was top 10 p4p at that time.
Hamed was a very good and very exciting fighter, but in my opinion was never elite.
I believe Naz himself was the only P4P featherweight in the late 90s.
You can only meet P4P fighters if they are of similar size/weight to you. I think you will find plenty of fighters become "elite" without beating a fellow P4P incumbent - Hopkins, Lopez etc...
Good point on that, but when Nas dd meet someone who was p4p that was his own size, the outcome was a massive beat down by a guy jumping up in weight.
I've been pretty much tryng to stay out of his debate between you and VD, but I have to agree with him, that Nas never beat any one that was elite and when he did meet someone that was elite it was 1 sided.
I don't see him beating either JMM or Morales at 126.
I've never once said Naz beat an elite fighter - as in a P4P star or an all-time great. I've simply stated he beat the "elite featherweights" (top rated, most decorated) of his time. I've never once called Naz a "great" during this thread.
Greats like Morales never went to featherweight until the end of Naz's era. And Naz basically had to chose between Barrera and Morales at that time. Maybe it wouldn't have mattered by then ;)
Of course you didn't. I'm a give you a little credit. It was a good try. And I can see your little trick working against others. But I saw right through it. I let it play out a little before I wrecked it.
It's like this. Naseem never beat an elite fighter who was in his prime. Thats an indisputable fact. Not even his most loyal can offer an argument without looking like fools. It's why you kept using the word Featherweight. Like I said security blanket. You threw out names under that banner to try and make your point. But eventually you knew it was only a matter of time before I grew bored of you and just put you out your misery. You prepared for it. After making it clear to everybody not brain dead that Robinson, Ingle and Medina were not elite fighters and it's true in fact what Violent D says, you don't get hit to hard. All you had to say is what you just said.
"I uh, uh never said Hamed beat an elite fighter. I said he beat an elite Featherweight. Featherweight. Only talking about that weight"
I'm a cut you some slack and not ask you to explain the shameful ducking of the original question that was asked of you. Ask you can see it's quite clear not the one you were answering.
You haven't wrecked a thing. Anyone with half a brain cell can see I bounce you all over the shop.
The fact is - Naz beat all the elite/best featherweights of his day and ducked nobody.
The end.
To bad the good ones were all past there prime. And the ones that were, weren't that good. Fact.
Another fact is Hamed never beat an elite fighter in his prime.
Prime is debatable.
The only bombproof unquestionable fact is - Naz beat all the elite/best most decorated featherweights of his day and ducked nobody. Fact.
Whoomp there it is
Yeah ok. Going by your analogy and the fact that he beat O'Neil Bell, Wayne Braithwaite, Dale Brown and Virgil Hill (the "elite" Cruiserweights at that time) Hamed's legacy is pretty much the same as that of Jean Marc Mormeck. :lolhaha: And that's a fact
Game. Set. Match. Point
An utterly foolish comparison.
Mormeck never reigned unbeaten with all the pieces intact. He was also KO'd twice.
It took an all-time great to disable Naz.
Whoomp there it is
The only All Time Great he ever faced.
Damn! You got knocked the fuck out
I never once disputed Naz lost to the only all-time great he faced.
The only thing that got knocked the fuck out was your reading comprehension. Fact.
Whoomp there it is
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Are you to still going at it? VD you are right and Fenster is wrong. fact.
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Are you to still going at it? VD you are right and Fenster is wrong. fact.
This is over.
And you thought VD was right? :LOLATYOU:
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Are you to still going at it? VD you are right and Fenster is wrong. fact.
This is over.
And you thought VD was right? :LOLATYOU:
Sometimes he can be.
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Are you to still going at it? VD you are right and Fenster is wrong. fact.
Everybody could see that. But boy just has a hard time accepting reality. I'll let him have the last word in and let him think he won.
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
simply put, hamed was a true blue baby-blue hype job. the only great fighter he ever fought, barrera, he got totally taken to school and (graduated with honors). marquez would have probably done a more masterful job than barrera because he was more of a counterpuncher than barrera. and please don't forget that erik morales wanted a piece of that action and would have tapped that a-- as well. in boxing and like miguel vazquez showed last night, you need more than a punch to be considered great. what's the saying? offense wins fights but defense wins championships, especially at the highest levels?
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
'Heard JMM avoided EM too (more like turned down actually). Juan Manuel Marquez: Returning From The Dead
The fight would've been sweet.
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
where did you hear this crapola that jmm avoided erik morales? that is a bunch of bullshit! when jmm was coming up the featherweight ranks, it was both barrera and morales who were avoiding jmm. next time get your facts straight!
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
milmascaras1
where did you hear this crapola that jmm avoided erik morales? that is a bunch of bullshit! when jmm was coming up the featherweight ranks, it was both barrera and morales who were avoiding jmm. next time get your facts straight!
lol. Those guys beat the best in the world but avoided someone who got owned by Chris John and Norwood? Yeah right
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
game,
marquez got owned by chris john and norwood? shows how little you know about boxing. with the exception of the mayweather fight, it can be seriously argued that marquez could be undefeated if not for stupid politics in boxing.
and yes, it's a fact, morales and barrera did duck marquez when they were at super bantam and featherweight. so sorry for the bad news!
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
milmascaras1
game,
marquez got owned by chris john and norwood? shows how little you know about boxing. with the exception of the mayweather fight, it can be seriously argued that marquez could be undefeated if not for stupid politics in boxing.
and yes, it's a fact, morales and barrera did duck marquez when they were at super bantam and featherweight. so sorry for the bad news!
Yeah you keep believing that if it helps you sleep at night. Thats total rubbish and only a fool would say summat like that. Marquez is done. He wont even go anywhere near Khan. Says it all.
Re: Naz-vs-Marquez? The greatest duck in history? Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GAME
Quote:
Originally Posted by
milmascaras1
game,
marquez got owned by chris john and norwood? shows how little you know about boxing. with the exception of the mayweather fight, it can be seriously argued that marquez could be undefeated if not for stupid politics in boxing.
and yes, it's a fact, morales and barrera did duck marquez when they were at super bantam and featherweight. so sorry for the bad news!
Yeah you keep believing that if it helps you sleep at night. Thats total rubbish and only a fool would say summat like that. Marquez is done. He wont even go anywhere near Khan. Says it all.
What says it all is Con is more likely to face DeMarcus Corley than he is Marcos Maidana
