Alright lets do a boxing experiment

In class one of my teachers suggested that public opinion is skewed by bias. And he had us each write down something in sports of politics or anything that they don't like or did like, and when he asked them why or why not.

But here was the catch, you couldn't name any personal vendetta. Why? Because Personal vendetta's do not take away from professional accomplishments. So he made us weigh all the professional accomplishments of an individual and made us judge them not by who they were outside of the division but who they were in it.

And most peoples choices, once that was taken away they had no reason to hate them and had to give them the credit. Or some of them still had a reason to hate them and gave a valid point.

And that got me to thinking...

Most boxing fans I see, or read, that have a personal dislike for a fighter is 95 percent taken...from personal vendetta's of who they are outside the ring, or what they THINK they are outside the ring or certain qualities they don't like, so that they do as fans as they take a loss, or they take a performance and pile on the discrediting of a fighter.


For example, these fans can take a Floyd Mayweather knockout and point out everything wrong in the matchup and try to take credit away. If Mayweather knocks him out they say "But Mayweather had trouble early, he will be exposed soon."

So I decided to do an experiment, each day or so I'll post a boxer's name and my opinion of them. And you fans or non-fans can write in here your opinion, but the catch is you have to weigh their accomplishments and WHEN the accomplishments were(as in a fighter they beat in 99, do not take credit away if they are bums in 2008, look at who the fighter was when they fought them and not who they are now, this making the achievement more relevant)


Alright now the first boxer we will talk about will be this boxer


Max Kellerman talked about this as the "featherweight era"

So the first boxer we'll talk about that started this whole featherweight era is the one boxer you all love to hate.


Naseem Hamed


Now I know just by reading that name you'll want to flame me, but lets get things straight here.


Despite him being cocky, arrogant disrespectful, or whatever you want to call it. Naseem Hamed held the featherweight division on his back for 5 years since winning that title and brought the lower weight divisions, the divisions that pacquiao barerra morales and marquez now have their classics in, it was this little man who brought that division center stage before all of them. Hamed was one of the highest grossing boxers of all time and one of the most viewed and well known boxers of the 20th century, back by many entertainers,, it could be argued that the only boxer more famous then Naseem Hamed from the mid 90s till 2000 was Oscar De La Hoya.

And he brought a new audience into boxing, if not an interest in "little people" fighting, that the hardcore boxing fans already knew about. While the 'casual' boxing fans only care about heavyweights and maybe a little below. Naseem Hamed made them watch, if at the very least demanded that they watch him, and yes half the people who watched him watched him because they wanted him get beat but regardless he resparked the interest in an otherwise dead featherweight division and put a spark in boxing which at that time seemed to be losing its edge somewhat, and he carried that entire featherweight division on his back for those 5 years.

That focus on that division and divisions lower brought us the classic's we know today and this is just my opinion, but it was Naseem Hamed that was the first to put them on center stage and you would be hard pressed to have found a better featherweight then him during his run. Its not his fault he was so overwhelmingly better then everyone, and in many ways thats why we watched him, to see him get beat or to see the spectacle. And not only was Hamed the entire game, he was its halftime entertainment. Whenever a boxer has a somewhat flashy entrance the name announcers usually always grab is Naseem Hamed's.


And you may not want to believe it but in my opinion boxing and its fans are looking for that kind of explosion of excitement again. And inside I think a lot of people miss what he brought to the table in terms of entertainment and of course knockouts and that is something that should be appreciated and he should be given credit for. In fact if you want the gospel truth(as i was watching the event) when Manny Pacquiao first burst onto the seen as a replacement winning by knockout on a ppv undercard, I remember the announcers with a bit of awe in their voices, saying they hadn't seen a little guy that explosive since Naseem Hamed. And soon Manny Pacquiao started appearing on more and more and more PPV cards.

Like I said, boxing, and its fans, have been looking for that kind of excitement, explosion from a single individual in boxing since Hamed's departure from the boxing scene.

Of course thats my opinion, and yes I know he lost to Barerra and you can call it exposure if you want and he didn't come back. But regardless of that, it doesn't take away the above. Max Kellerman wanted to talk about the "featherweight era" on Boxing after dark. Prince Naseem Hamed was the start of it. And he was the one who gave life, to an otherwise dead division.






Alright thats my imput on the boxer of choice, be sure to put in your imput as well, and I do hope this becomes a great threat that we can air our our thoughts about boxers without sounding like "Idiot biased blinded jerks" that most of the IBC(Internet Boxing Community) makes us out to be.

What an excellent topic !!!

You picked the fighter that I have the greatest perosnal 'vendetta' against too !!!

It's very diifucult to set aside a peronal 'opinion' off a fighter. I like the word 'opinion' rather than vendetta as that describes my feeling better.

Your description of Naseem is for me spot on, Nas brought a while new fan base to boxing in general , the lighter weights and British boxing especially. He was exciting, appealed to the younger genration and for a while appeared outside the ring to remian down to earth.

His fights were more than controlled violence they were a specatcale. From the weigh in, the entrance, the fight itself and even the post fight interview you got entertainment.

Naz brought frightening power to the featherweights. All through his fights you knew that at any moment he could catch a guy and he'd be in trouble. He also brought that Ingle style and watching him limbo dance against Robinson before dismantling him with power and precision was something to behold.

Naseem was the guy who re lit the fire of interest in the lighter weight divisions and no matter what his failings in and out of the ring later on I will be forever grateful for that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shamrock

What an excellent topic !!!

You picked the fighter that I have the greatest perosnal 'vendetta' against too !!!

It's very diifucult to set aside a peronal 'opinion' off a fighter. I like the word 'opinion' rather than vendetta as that describes my feeling better.

Your description of Naseem is for me spot on, Nas brought a while new fan base to boxing in general , the lighter weights and British boxing especially. He was exciting, appealed to the younger genration and for a while appeared outside the ring to remian down to earth.

His fights were more than controlled violence they were a specatcale. From the weigh in, the entrance, the fight itself and even the post fight interview you got entertainment.

Naz brought frightening power to the featherweights. All through his fights you knew that at any moment he could catch a guy and he'd be in trouble. He also brought that Ingle style and watching him limbo dance against Robinson before dismantling him with power and precision was something to behold.

Naseem was the guy who re lit the fire of interest in the lighter weight divisions and no matter what his failings in and out of the ring later on I will be forever grateful for that.

---

Exactly the kind of response I like to see :) :coolclick: = REP!

Recon it would do some flexable fighters good to study his fights for exactly what you can get away with and power generation through the legs off some low angles.

This is very interesting and some points are very good...
I can usually seperate my opinion of a fighter as a person, and their actual performances in the ring... Their are some fighters that I don't like much and think the word Vendetta isn't to strong a word to use against their personalities,,, but I find it very hard to pick fault in them as fighters, and give them credit for their acheivments..


I just have a small other point to make that is quite off the boxing topic, but I think may be related a little to the outline of your experiment..
Back when the Vietnam war was on and there was a LOT of protesters out there campaigning and protesting against the war, a guy (whom's name I cannot recall although I will look it up) did a big study of people who were protesting against the war.. I think they were called "conciencious objectors"
One of the interesting things he found after interviewing hundreds and hundreds of the anti-war protesters was that, only around 15 to 20% of the people he interviewed had genuine reasons for hating and being against the war.. They had weighed up both sides of the story, looked at the for's and againsts,, knew the facts,,, and in the end had conciously and logically made up their mind exactly why they were against the war. And were right in their mind to protest against it.. The other 80% had trouble giving little more than a reguratation of a couple of the main points that the protesters were shouting, as to why they were against the war.. They could not logically, and far from convincingly, tell the researcher why they were against the war.. Whats more, many protestors had a limited, if any, understanding of why America was even at war..
The theory of this may somehow tie a little into your experiement.. Or I may be crazy... :confused:

I enjoyed watching HamHead

Even as a kid he was fun to watch

Amatuer Naz Video:

BoxingHumor.Net Archive Amatuer Naz

He was humiliated into humbleness and vice versa.
Pride comes before the fall.

He talked all this smack, lost once and never came back.

I wanted to see him come back. Champions come back from a loss.
Great topic btw.

Excellent topic Majesty i'll rep you after i've finished this post. I have to say before i start writing this out i do hate Naz but i'll try and be as unbiased as i can anyway. The first real Naz fight i see was his fight against Steve Robinson, i didn't see it at the time i watched a repeat of it back in 1997. Now when i watched it i was impressed with Naz's power, speed, reflexes etc. Robinson did have a bad record but what a lot of people don't realize. Is that Robinson won the title off John Davidson and the amazing thing about that was that Robinson took the fight on 48 hours notice and he won impressively which was shocking to see. Robinson then went on to defend the title 7 more times until he got battered by Naz. It has to be said though that Robinson only beat decent opposition when he was champion.

The next fight i saw of Naz's was against Said Lawal not at the time it happened but a repeat, i didn't know anything about the fight previously, and just as i was getting comfy in my chair. BOOM the first punch Naz landed and down went Lawal i was shocked to see such a little man with so much power, Lawal got up but was badly shaken and was shortly stopped after that. The next fight i saw of Naz's was Manuel Medina and as i remember it this was a very tough nights work for Naz as he did take many punches in this fight than he ever had to this point in his career. I then see Naz take apart decent fighters like Molina and Johnson in which he looked mighty impressive.

I then see his wild fight with Kevin Kelley and i think this fight did really expose how bad Naz's defense was, and how poor his balance was. Yes he did get the job done eventually but only after getting 3 knockdowns against him. I knew after this fight that he would get exposed eventually. But i have to admit after Naz took apart iron chinned Wayne McCullough i was impressed and my faith in him did comeback slightly but i still thought he had poor defense and balance. I also believe this was Naz's last fight with Bredan Ingle wasn't it ?? The next fight i saw was his fight with Paul Ingle. Now Ingle was game and gave Naz a few problems and he did bloody Naz's nose but still Ingle was getting out boxed clearly and he did hit the deck x2 i believe. But then out of nowhere Ingle started to put some real hurt on Naz in the 10th round and come close to stopping him as i remember it. But Naz showing grit come out in the next round and finished Ingle in impressive fashion.

Then i saw Naz's fight with Cesar Soto which was a very dirty fight and controversial. Naz was doing his fair share of kneeing Soto in the head and groin plus tackling him which was knocking the wind out of Soto. Soto was also doing a lot of spoiling himself by clinching, overall bad fight and i wish i would have never watched it. Oh by the way just a little bit history for you folks before i continue, Soto was the first man to beat Jose Luis Castillo he stopped Castillo in the 2nd round. The next fight i saw of Naz's was his fight with Augie Sanchez, Naz redeemed himself in this one by stopping Sanchez in exciting and impressive fashion.

Now onto MAB vs Naz now before the fight i had watched Barrera for sometime and i knew he would be the man to beat Naz. I even had a bet with someone at school that MAB would beat Naz. Naz wasn't at his best to be fair as he took Barrera far too lightly. He thought because Barrera was moving up to fight him, that his power would be too much for the smaller man aka Barrera moving up. But boy was Naz wrong as he was constantly kept off balance by Barrera's jab. Barrera boxed beautifully as he countered and and basically gave Naz a boxing lesson and i have to be honest i loved every minute of it. After the fight i knew Naz would never comeback from that. In fact i lost all the respect i had for Naz to be honest. Because he couldn't accept defeat and he basically gave up. Ok he did have one more fight after that but it was a terrible fight and the crowd was even walking out during the fight.

Final comments Naz was an exciting fighter with cat like reflexes, amazing power for his size, and good hand speed and i loved his ring entrances. But it has to be said Naz had poor boxing skills and that let him down badly against Barrera, he also had terrible balance. But overall he was good for the sport because everyone hated him and everyone wanted to see him lose and he done his job by putting asses in seats and then excitingly Knocking out his opponents.

The sad thing about the Naz V MAB fight is that the early version of Naz had the tools and the style to win. I always thought that Naseems unothadox style and the way he could put power in a punch from an unepected angle would have been too much for Marco.

I honestly believe that Naz was on his way to being a shot fighter by the time they fought. Nazeem simply expected to go in there and land that 1 big shot that would effectivley take him out of the fight. If he had boxed and moved and frustrated MAB for several rounds he may well have found that conclusive punch. To stay in range and from the start look to take MAB out with one shot was suicidal. I don't know if this was a conscious decsion from Naseem or if he really just did not have the tools anymore... On reflection I'm leaning more and more to the latter.

Good Stuff Mate...The whole Vandetta thing is a bit off to me only because it would mean you are judging someone you know personally...To have a vandetta against a totla stranger IMO is a bit off in the head...Just my opp...

But as for the rest of it I understand completely...Thats why I always give guys credit deserved but also mention I think they are ass's...If I don't like a fighter because of attitude or something I just don't like them...Can't take away from accomplishments though....Gotta give someone his due for that...Try to say a guy who won titles in different weight classes or something like that is a "Bum" so to speak since it seems to be a favorite term to toss around...is just stupidity IMO

Yeah, I hate Naz, too, but there is no denying his talent or his importance to boxing especially the lower weight classes. He made a lot of money for Barerra, Moralles, Pac, and a whole lot of others.

It's very hard for me to judge Naz objectively as fighter be cause he annoys me with both his style and his personality. I probably underrate him as a fighter because of these biases. For a long time, I underated Jones, and I still probably rate him less than most. It's hard for me to certain if I'm being fully objective.

I'm enough of a student of the game to respect Naz's natural talent and great impact on the sport, but I prefer more conventional boxers. Most of my favorite boxers are guys who might not have the greatest physical gifts, but they have worked their way to greatness. I also like guys who DO have great physical gifts and still take the time to perfect technique. Nobody worked harder than Ali, and he was about as gifted as they come. Still, at the end of the day, I prefer Frazier.

On the other hand, I hate Floyd's personality and would like nothing better than to see him lose, but I think I evaluate him pretty accurately. He's joy to watch in the ring. I root for him to finally make a mistake, but at the same time, I'm in awe of what he can do, his skill, his speed, his technique. I'll never deny he's p4p #1 right now.

The only thing that beat Naz was Himself, arrogant cunt. There was something special with him. Never mind what people say Brendan did a first class job there in nuturing him. But the egocentric arsehole, went and ruined it.

You guys there are lots of fighters people don't like to watch at all and disapprove of their tactics in the ring: Ruiz, Raheem, Darchinyan (for me), Sam peter's rabbit punches, Acelino quitting. Is this what you were talking about?

I hear you big guy, that is a very logical and reasonable approach....and by that rational Wladimir Klitschko gets the respect he deserves! ;D




....so does Floyd Mayweather Jr., but I have always disliked him as a PERSON or you could even call him a character but as a fighter he has all the skill in the world and I have always admitted it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scrap

The only thing that beat Naz was Himself, arrogant cunt. There was something special with him. Never mind what people say Brendan did a first class job there in nuturing him. But the egocentric arsehole, went and ruined it.

---

Agreed Naz was something special and could have been an ATG not just in the FW division but in all of boxing and the guy just let it all go:-\..

His choice I guess but just bothers me that there are a 1000 guys out there who train there asse's off and try day in and day out but have not even 10% of his ability that wish theyu had even half of it

Im loving the replies here and so far its going very good :)

Can we do this for Eubank next please ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shamrock

Can we do this for Eubank next please ;)

---

You bet :) After a few more replies, Thursday i'll start a new topic in here about Chris Eubank.