Another Question Who Is Best Defensive Fighter Of All Time

[ryanman]

he was off balance against kelley!he did get tagged occasionaly (i wouldnt say quite a lot) but with his style most would have been hit regually.im not implying naz was the greatest defensive boxer of all time,that would be crazy,but a good slipper and mover

[SweetPea]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

[ryanman]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

his balance was not awful!to throw the punches he did from the angles he did takes exceptional balance.In his first 25 pro fights he barely ever got hit,then he changed his style (and trainer) and became far more hittable,culmulating in his defeat to MAB, a defeat he would not have suffered if he'd stayed with Ingle

[SweetPea]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

his balance was not awful!to throw the punches he did from the angles he did takes exceptional balance.In his first 25 pro fights he barely ever got hit,then he changed his style (and trainer) and became far more hittable,culmulating in his defeat to MAB, a defeat he would not have suffered if he'd stayed with Ingle

Ya, it was all Emmanuel Steward's fault.
The difference in results after the first 25 fights might have something to do with the fact that he started fighting good fighters.

[cockey cockney]

Pernell and Pepp are my top 2. Went for Pernell as i grew up watchin alot of his fights and it always amazed me how he flew up the weights embarrasing bigger men at times, phenomenal defence.

[ryanman]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

his balance was not awful!to throw the punches he did from the angles he did takes exceptional balance.In his first 25 pro fights he barely ever got hit,then he changed his style (and trainer) and became far more hittable,culmulating in his defeat to MAB, a defeat he would not have suffered if he'd stayed with Ingle

Ya, it was all Emmanuel Steward's fault.
The difference in results after the first 25 fights might have something to do with the fact that he started fighting good fighters.

damn,you're just too good.it was all naz's fault.it really was,he wasted his talent.also can you not see the obvious change in his style once he left ingle?and that that change would make him more hittable?

[Beanflicker]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

his balance was not awful!to throw the punches he did from the angles he did takes exceptional balance.In his first 25 pro fights he barely ever got hit,then he changed his style (and trainer) and became far more hittable,culmulating in his defeat to MAB, a defeat he would not have suffered if he'd stayed with Ingle

Ya, it was all Emmanuel Steward's fault.
The difference in results after the first 25 fights might have something to do with the fact that he started fighting good fighters.

damn,you're just too good.it was all naz's fault.it really was,he wasted his talent.also can you not see the obvious change in his style once he left ingle?and that that change would make him more hittable?

I know you're being sarcastic, but is it so wrong to believe that a fighter's loss was actually HIS fault? Have we gone so far with these lame modern day excuses that this is now a strange concept?

[SweetPea]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

his balance was not awful!to throw the punches he did from the angles he did takes exceptional balance.In his first 25 pro fights he barely ever got hit,then he changed his style (and trainer) and became far more hittable,culmulating in his defeat to MAB, a defeat he would not have suffered if he'd stayed with Ingle

Ya, it was all Emmanuel Steward's fault.
The difference in results after the first 25 fights might have something to do with the fact that he started fighting good fighters.

damn,you're just too good.it was all naz's fault.it really was,he wasted his talent.also can you not see the obvious change in his style once he left ingle?and that that change would make him more hittable?

I know you're being sarcastic, but is it so wrong to believe that a fighter's loss was actually HIS fault? Have we gone so far with these lame modern day excuses that this is now a strange concept?

Thank you.
Hamed didn't lose to Barrera because he changed his style, or because he left his genius trainer, etc.
He lost because Barrera was BETTER.
If all Hamed had to do to be the best was switch back to his old style or get away from Steward, then he would have done that. Instead, he ran away from the sport and spent the last 5 years eating cheeseburgers. What does that tell you?

[ryanman]

i was actually being serious,it was naz's fault.he should have stayed with ingle.im not sure who decided to change his stance,but whether that was naz or manny it was a crucial factor in his demise

[ryanman]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

his balance was not awful!to throw the punches he did from the angles he did takes exceptional balance.In his first 25 pro fights he barely ever got hit,then he changed his style (and trainer) and became far more hittable,culmulating in his defeat to MAB, a defeat he would not have suffered if he'd stayed with Ingle

Ya, it was all Emmanuel Steward's fault.
The difference in results after the first 25 fights might have something to do with the fact that he started fighting good fighters.

damn,you're just too good.it was all naz's fault.it really was,he wasted his talent.also can you not see the obvious change in his style once he left ingle?and that that change would make him more hittable?

I know you're being sarcastic, but is it so wrong to believe that a fighter's loss was actually HIS fault? Have we gone so far with these lame modern day excuses that this is now a strange concept?

Thank you.
Hamed didn't lose to Barrera because he changed his style, or because he left his genius trainer, etc.
He lost because Barrera was BETTER.
If all Hamed had to do to be the best was switch back to his old style or get away from Steward, then he would have done that. Instead, he ran away from the sport and spent the last 5 years eating cheeseburgers. What does that tell you?

did you sc me?you bastard

[SweetPea]

he was off balance against kelley!

Exactly!
If there's one common trait that all the great defensive fighters share, it's phenomenal balance. Naz's balance was consistently awful, I don't see how anyone can dispute this. Any cleanly landed punch could either knock him down or send him flailing.
I wouldn't even rank Hamed among the top 15-20 defensive fighters of this decade, let alone all-time.

his balance was not awful!to throw the punches he did from the angles he did takes exceptional balance.In his first 25 pro fights he barely ever got hit,then he changed his style (and trainer) and became far more hittable,culmulating in his defeat to MAB, a defeat he would not have suffered if he'd stayed with Ingle

Ya, it was all Emmanuel Steward's fault.
The difference in results after the first 25 fights might have something to do with the fact that he started fighting good fighters.

damn,you're just too good.it was all naz's fault.it really was,he wasted his talent.also can you not see the obvious change in his style once he left ingle?and that that change would make him more hittable?

I know you're being sarcastic, but is it so wrong to believe that a fighter's loss was actually HIS fault? Have we gone so far with these lame modern day excuses that this is now a strange concept?

Thank you.
Hamed didn't lose to Barrera because he changed his style, or because he left his genius trainer, etc.
He lost because Barrera was BETTER.
If all Hamed had to do to be the best was switch back to his old style or get away from Steward, then he would have done that. Instead, he ran away from the sport and spent the last 5 years eating cheeseburgers. What does that tell you?

did you sc me?you B******

If by "SC", you mean sad click, then no, it wasn't me. I come here to discuss boxing, not to sad click Hamed fanboys.

[ryanman]

im not a hamed fan boy,holy shit!i just said he had a decent defense for the most part.not the best!and he deserved to lose against MAB.done

[Beanflicker]

To be fair I got my hands on a Prince Career set and the guy had some amazing reflexes. He could avoid a punch, no question.

[SweetPea]

To be fair I got my hands on a Prince Career set and the guy had some amazing reflexes. He could avoid a punch, no question.

Not that amazing.

[Taeth]

Burn. However reflexes aren't everything because once Haseem would lean back he was screwed whereas WHitaker, Mayweather, Jones in their prime could all recover once they were in that position. THere is no question all three had better defense than Haseem. If Roy Jones Jr. actually used defense as opposed to reflexes I would say he by far has the best defense.