Is Naseem Hamed in the top 10 featherweights of all time?

[AC-Cobra]

I focused on where Nas excelled and where he failed. Naz was a very great fighter in his hay day, when he would use combinations and counter punching defense and angles and a shotgun jab. And he had that one punch power but it was never part of the gameplan to look for one shot, him just having it is what made him so unique.

But then he fell in love with that power and went away from his craft and became a guy who depended on awkwardness and just waiting to land one shot no matter what happened. That is why Barerra was able to outbox him. But the Naz that fought Steve Robinson, that used all those skills he had utilized I would pick against Barerra.

nice points. Never seen the Steve Robinson fight so I'll take your word for it, but the way you put it surely the fact that he fell in love with that one punch and his career detiorated as a result would sink him out of any top 10 list rather than one night of great performance catapulting you in there?

[The_One77]

i don't agree star, Robinson just looked plain amateurish imo
any slick boxer would of made Robinson look like a fool

[Purist]

I'll take your word for it, but the way you put it surely the fact that he fell in love with that one punch and his career detiorated as a result would sink him out of any top 10 list.

That is why I said I would put him in the top 10 or so. For that reason.

i don't agree star, Robinson just looked plain amateurish imo
any slick boxer would of made Robinson look like a fool

Robinson only looked amateurish because Hamed made him look that way

[berttrauttman]

There is such a marked difference in Naz with Brendan Ingle, and after they split. Although the Kelley fight went down well in the US (the last fight with Ingle), those in the UK who had followed his career from the early days were mightily worried, and it turned out to be the beginning of the end. As unconventional as Ingle's methods were, that style was the perfect vehicle for his natural attributes (lighning reflexes allowed him to get away with the hands-by-the-side defence, insane angles made the most of his undoubted power). Suarez and Steward took the edge of this style, and turned Naz into nothing more than a decent counterpuncher with a shit defence. As has been mentioned, the focus was all on his one punch power, and he got hit a lot more since he was planting his feet much more and was less mobile. I would say that the last 9 fights of his career (post Ingle, and Kelley) included the 6 worst performances of his career: Kelley, McCulloch, Soto, Sanchez, Barrera, Calvo.
I'd still have him in a top ten feather list though...

A decent article on his fall from grace: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/sport...774621,00.html

[berttrauttman]

forgot to mention, my favourite performance was Tom Johnson. He was superb that nite...

[The_One77]

I'll take your word for it, but the way you put it surely the fact that he fell in love with that one punch and his career detiorated as a result would sink him out of any top 10 list.

That is why I said I would put him in the top 10 or so. For that reason.

i don't agree star, Robinson just looked plain amateurish imo
any slick boxer would of made Robinson look like a fool

Robinson only looked amateurish because Hamed made him look that way

I would of beaten Robinson!
The guy just crouched in a shell the whole time...and when he did attack, he threw these amateurish hooks that Naseem could see a mile away.
lol, im pretty sure my bro said that same thing to you not long ago at this website.

[TitoFan]

Is this a real f*cking question?

[Purist]

I'll take your word for it, but the way you put it surely the fact that he fell in love with that one punch and his career detiorated as a result would sink him out of any top 10 list.

That is why I said I would put him in the top 10 or so. For that reason.

i don't agree star, Robinson just looked plain amateurish imo
any slick boxer would of made Robinson look like a fool

Robinson only looked amateurish because Hamed made him look that way

I would of beaten Robinson!
The guy just crouched in a shell the whole time...and when he did attack, he threw these amateurish hooks that Naseem could see a mile away.
lol, im pretty sure my bro said that same thing to you not long ago at this website.

Is that the only time you saw Robinson?

[The_One77]

i saw him knock out Duke Mackenzie with a body shot

[sanj16]

i don't agree star, Robinson just looked plain amateurish imo
any slick boxer would of made Robinson look like a fool

Robinson was a quality champion. Wouldn't say that he was anything outstanding, but definetly worth his title. Hamed just totally destroyed him that night. I would say that beating made Calazagi vs Lacy look close. Its such a shame to see that he had all that talent and just wasted it

[X]

As much as I hate to disrespect a fellow Welshman - Robinson was a journeyman who struck it lucky, the Cinderella man of the featherweights.

[Fenster]

Robinson was beat long before he got in the ring that night - Hamed challenging him to put his purse on the line winner takes all etc - but it quickly became apparent that Hamed was alot better than many had thought and was going to be a boxing superstar

There is such a marked difference in Naz with Brendan Ingle, and after they split. Although the Kelley fight went down well in the US (the last fight with Ingle), those in the UK who had followed his career from the early days were mightily worried, and it turned out to be the beginning of the end. As unconventional as Ingle's methods were, that style was the perfect vehicle for his natural attributes (lighning reflexes allowed him to get away with the hands-by-the-side defence, insane angles made the most of his undoubted power). Suarez and Steward took the edge of this style, and turned Naz into nothing more than a decent counterpuncher with a shit defence. As has been mentioned, the focus was all on his one punch power, and he got hit a lot more since he was planting his feet much more and was less mobile. I would say that the last 9 fights of his career (post Ingle, and Kelley) included the 6 worst performances of his career: Kelley, McCulloch, Soto, Sanchez, Barrera, Calvo.
I'd still have him in a top ten feather list though...

A decent article on his fall from grace: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/sport...774621,00.html

Good article. Click

[azumir]

Naseem Hamed - Does The Prince Belong In The Top Ten Greatest Ever Featherweights?

19.05.06 - By James Slater: Now that we can all pretty much take for granted the fact that Naseem Hamed's career is over as a prize fighter, what with his jail sentence, it is time to evaluate his achievements as a boxer. I vividly remember Emanuel Steward, who was training Hamed at the time, telling an interviewer that Naseem Hamed would, in time, go down in history as the greatest featherweight of all-time. I was shocked by those words, coming as they did from a highly knowledgeable and respected trainer. No way did I agree then (the statement was made by Emanuel just prior to the Barrera fight, back in 2001) and no way do I agree now.

Just where then, does The Prince, as he was once known - he surely does not deserve to be referred to in such revered terms today, not after his unforgivable behaviour during the immediate aftermath of the car crash for which he is now serving jail time- rank amongst the very best in featherweight history? Many will disagree, but to my mind he does not belong in a list of the top ten finest featherweights of all-time.

In fact, when Steward made his amazing statement I fully believe the likes of Sandy Saddler, Henry Armstrong and Salvador Sanchez were turning over in their graves! And as for the truly gifted featherweight boxers from yesteryear who are still with us, along with quite a few from more recent years - some of whom are still active - they too must have at the very least raised an eyebrow or two upon hearing the lavish praise Emanuel was bestowing on his fighter at the time.

Hamed was blessed with awesome punch power and early on in his career - when he trained with diligence- his speed and accuracy, as well as his work rate were very good indeed. It wasn't too long though, before Naseem began to rely on his KO power and this alone to pull out the victory. Men like Kevin Kelley, Augie Sanchez and of course Barrera, found massive holes in Hamed's style of fighting, as the former two names knocked him down in alarming fashion, while Marco became the only man to defeat him. And while Hamed's overall record is impressive - what with one solitary loss- what he did after this loss speaks volumes regarding his true fighting heart when it is compared with the legends from his division. Instead of putting the rematch clause option he had for a return with the Mexican great into operation Naseem let its year long validity expire. Even though he could have met Barrera in his hometown in a second encounter. This is not how true champions, let alone all-time greats, react.

Imagine someone like Willie Pep, for example, losing to Saddler for the first time and then never facing him again. No way would he have been able to live with himself without at least trying to get revenge. To have actually done so is the mark of a true champion. Hamed never showed this quality. To have virtually retired after his first ever defeat is a fact that really hurts his legacy. I just cannot in good conscience rate Hamed above fighters such as Pep and Saddler, Armstrong, Sanchez, Barrera, Morales, Pacquiao, Arguello, Nelson or even McGuigan. To me these fighters showed more desire, guts and heart than Naseem ever did.

Though I'm fully aware many will disagree, in my opinion Naseem Hamed has no place in the all-time top ten featherweights in history.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/news.php?p=6997&more=1

It is hard to conclude as he fought relative few world-class opponents. Anyway, he had the potential to be among top 10.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Simply. NO

[Purist]

People always want to bring someone down when they are at their worst. which is what that article did.