Quote Originally Posted by Markusdarkus View Post
Quote Originally Posted by ICB View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Majesty View Post

Hamed was a good counterpuncher and i've seen him having a pretty solid defense, he relied on his reflexes 99 percent of the time but i was pretty sure his defense was pretty good since he started his career as they called a "fancy dan with knockout power" He looked pretty good defensively, he was knocked down by Alicea but he looked pretty good dodging punches in that fight. You think Pacquiao has a better defense then Hamed did? How so?
Remember a decent Southpaw named Kevin Kelley ?? he scored 3 knockdowns on Naz because he countered Naz, now just imagine Pacquiao in Kelley's shoes Majesty. Just raising this question to give you something to think about, Naz had terrible balance and he could be countered. And Pacquiao is an underrated counter puncher he even countered a very good counter puncher like Marquez in there 2nd fight, and he is much faster and much more powerful than Kelley is.

Hamed was already on the downside by the Kelly fight.

Hamed beat everyone he could he held every belt at 126lbs.

I think Pac would have won but by Barerra Hamed was a shadow.
How could he be on the downside when he hadn't shown any sign's of it in previous fights ?? like i said don't you think it has something to do with Naz stepping up in class that made him look bad. Remember that was Naz's first fight in the USA.