Originally Posted by
Master
Again you cite age as a factor when it is not always the case. Certain fighters peak young such as Tyson others later in life Johnny Nelson and some just fight at the top level for many years such as Hopkins.
I know Naz lost to Barrera and it was a surprise because Marco had lost to Junior Jones and Morales. Peak Naz would have had a plan B and C if required to beat Barrera. Naz was clueless in the fight so much so that it had to be down to the fact he was finished at the top level. He only fought once after that fight.
Naz beat some quality fighters in his time and to do that he had to adapt. Naz would break down his opponents bit by bit and if he could not stop them he would comprehensively out box them and win on points.
Not having this. "Cite age as a factor" mate, he was 27 years old. if you're saying his peak was 24, then I'm saying he never had a peak, he never fulfilled it. there is no reason why he shouldn't be at his peak at 27.
Barrera had lost to Junior Jones and Morales, but the Morales fight, a. was a classic between 2 TOP TOP fighters. and b. Many people (Me among them) thought he won. so the loss didn't take anything away from him , if anything it gave him more kudos.
The only reason he was finished at the top level was because Barrera finished him. and the only reason he only fought once more after that was because Barrera took his invincibility , his heart and his soul.
While Naz was winning , the cracks in his unorthodox style could be papered over. but once he got beat, his head was fucked. he couldn't believe that anybody could beat him , and he couldn't come back from that. This isn't meant to be a pop at Naz, but mentally he couldn't cope with losing.
This is more a pop at people like @
Master , who think that when they talk about the "best in the World" that the World starts in Cornwall and ends in Newcastle!
so disrespectful to other nationalities , and not just in Boxing either.
Bookmarks