Yeh, a harder one to call than might seem, whilest I'm going to stick by what i said, Hamed could easily make Fenech come on to his right hand.hhaehre wrote:I still like Hamed by ko. Hamed had big league power and Fenech would walk right into him. I'd root for Fenech all night but I'd put my money on Hamed.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Fenech was stopped by Nelson. Hamed was a whisker away from being stopped by KelleySOUTHPAW wrote: WHICH ONE OF THESE GOT STOPPED AGAIN....THATS RIGHT FENECH.....
(League rules btw)
hamed v fenech
Re: hamed v fenech
Re: hamed v fenech
KELLY COULD BAND A BIT AND TO BE FAIR NELSON WAS AT TIMES A LAZY FIGHTER LIKE IN THERE FIRST FIGHT...WASNT IN THE SECOND AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENEDGoodnight, Irene wrote:Fenech was stopped by Nelson. Hamed was a whisker away from being stopped by KelleySOUTHPAW wrote:WHICH ONE OF THESE GOT STOPPED AGAIN....THATS RIGHT FENECH.....dberry wrote:I don't like either of them, but Feneck was an agressive, powerful animal whilest Hamed was a glass chined, cotton woolled, hit and run boxer with no defense but his extraordinary moovement. Fenech by stoppage.
Re: hamed v fenech
Didnt dominated the second fight and lets face it Hamed was past it by thenGoodnight, Irene wrote:Quite easy? Gimme a break. I'm sure there's not an ounce of nationalism in this post at allSOUTHPAW wrote:A PEAK HAMED WOULD BEAT FENECH QUITE EASY PICK HIM TO BITS OR KO HIM WITH ONE OF THE COUNTERS![]()
Best respective opponents, Fenech dominated Nelson, while Hamed was embarrassed by Barrera.
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: hamed v fenech
Please. Nationalism. Nothing more.
-
oliverfennell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 5564
- Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37
Re: hamed v fenech
Yes, Hamed was dropped a few times but at no point was he a "whisker away" from being stopped. They were not heavy knockdowns.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Fenech was stopped by Nelson. Hamed was a whisker away from being stopped by KelleySOUTHPAW wrote:WHICH ONE OF THESE GOT STOPPED AGAIN....THATS RIGHT FENECH.....dberry wrote:I don't like either of them, but Feneck was an agressive, powerful animal whilest Hamed was a glass chined, cotton woolled, hit and run boxer with no defense but his extraordinary moovement. Fenech by stoppage.
-
oliverfennell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 5564
- Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37
Re: hamed v fenech
Didn't realise either of them were that way inclined.dberry wrote:Hamed could easily make Fenech come on to his right hand.
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: hamed v fenech
Getting knocked down four or five times or whatever it was runs the risk of inducing a ref to stop a fight. Were it not for the knockdowns he was producing in return, maybe the ref stops it in spite of Hamed not being hurt.
At any rate, my point is it's plain stupid for someone to imply Fenech was stopped by Nelson & Hamed was never beaten inside the distance, hence, Hamed is greater. Also, Fenech realistically went 1-1 with Nelson (discounting their circus show a year or two back), while Hamed certainly had no intentions of levelling the ledger against Barrera.
Right hand as big as Thor's hammer, heart the size of a tic-tac. Fenech would've taken the latter, even if it came to absorbing the former on occasion. Myself, I think he's too busy for Hamed to ever feel comfortable enough to win.
At any rate, my point is it's plain stupid for someone to imply Fenech was stopped by Nelson & Hamed was never beaten inside the distance, hence, Hamed is greater. Also, Fenech realistically went 1-1 with Nelson (discounting their circus show a year or two back), while Hamed certainly had no intentions of levelling the ledger against Barrera.
Right hand as big as Thor's hammer, heart the size of a tic-tac. Fenech would've taken the latter, even if it came to absorbing the former on occasion. Myself, I think he's too busy for Hamed to ever feel comfortable enough to win.
-
oliverfennell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 5564
- Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37
Re: hamed v fenech
Yes, but he WAS producing (heavier) knockdowns in return, so therefore he was never a whisker away from being stopped.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Getting knocked down four or five times or whatever it was runs the risk of inducing a ref to stop a fight. Were it not for the knockdowns he was producing in return, maybe the ref stops it in spite of Hamed not being hurt.
At any rate, my point is it's plain stupid for someone to imply Fenech was stopped by Nelson & Hamed was never beaten inside the distance, hence, Hamed is greater. Also, Fenech realistically went 1-1 with Nelson (discounting their circus show a year or two back), while Hamed certainly had no intentions of levelling the ledger against Barrera.[/quote]
Agreed. False logic.
If the stoppage comparison is "plain stupid", then so too is the suggestion that Hamed lacked heart. You can criticise him for suffering multiple knockdowns, but he always got up and he always came back to win (MAB didn't knock him down). You can criticise the direction his career took in later years in terms of him neglecting his talents and making poor choices, and definitely you can criticise the way his career ended, and while you might say he lacked heart by not chasing a Barrera rematch, I don't think it's fair to say he lacked heart in the ring. Even when being mastered by Barrera, there was no quit in him.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Right hand as big as Thor's hammer, heart the size of a tic-tac. Fenech would've taken the latter, even if it came to absorbing the former on occasion. Myself, I think he's too busy for Hamed to ever feel comfortable enough to win.
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: hamed v fenech
Now just a minute there, you sly little fox ;)
You claimed the knockdowns Hamed suffered, "weren't that heavy." Well, that in turn takes away from the, "heart" he showed in getting back up. If he wasn't hurt & they weren't heavy knockdowns, the feat is less impressive than it appears on paper. Then you claim he showed great heart in getting back up. Two bites of the cherry, there.
I was really referring specifically to the way he disappeared after Barrera in criticising his heart. That, to me, spoke of a guy without the courage of a champion.
You claimed the knockdowns Hamed suffered, "weren't that heavy." Well, that in turn takes away from the, "heart" he showed in getting back up. If he wasn't hurt & they weren't heavy knockdowns, the feat is less impressive than it appears on paper. Then you claim he showed great heart in getting back up. Two bites of the cherry, there.
I was really referring specifically to the way he disappeared after Barrera in criticising his heart. That, to me, spoke of a guy without the courage of a champion.
Re: hamed v fenech
Heavy knockdowns or not, he still got up and he never quit in the ring. Sure, you can criticize him for not rematching MAB but maybe he knew the gig was up and actually did the smart thing. I think it's hard to be critical of a guy who opted out after 37 pro fights, maybe he'll be one of the few ex. pugs not walking around on his heels at age 50.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Now just a minute there, you sly little fox ;)
You claimed the knockdowns Hamed suffered, "weren't that heavy." Well, that in turn takes away from the, "heart" he showed in getting back up. If he wasn't hurt & they weren't heavy knockdowns, the feat is less impressive than it appears on paper. Then you claim he showed great heart in getting back up. Two bites of the cherry, there.
I was really referring specifically to the way he disappeared after Barrera in criticising his heart. That, to me, spoke of a guy without the courage of a champion.
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: hamed v fenech
I disagree.
He had a sole defeat, was twenty-eight years old, & physically more than just fine. Wasn't a thing wrong with him, & wasn't a thing wrong with him continuing his career --- whether Barrera was a part of that or not. Bloke just up & quit.
Quit.
He had a sole defeat, was twenty-eight years old, & physically more than just fine. Wasn't a thing wrong with him, & wasn't a thing wrong with him continuing his career --- whether Barrera was a part of that or not. Bloke just up & quit.
Quit.
Re: hamed v fenech
Your wrong....all fighters have different peaks and Hamed was past his as his last few fights showed just get over the fact fenech would have got ko'dGoodnight, Irene wrote:I disagree.
He had a sole defeat, was twenty-eight years old, & physically more than just fine. Wasn't a thing wrong with him, & wasn't a thing wrong with him continuing his career --- whether Barrera was a part of that or not. Bloke just up & quit.
Quit.
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: hamed v fenech
Getting lazy & neglecting your craft doesn't mean you're, "past your peak."
That's nonsense. If Hamed started putting in less than 100% (which, IMO, he did) at the back-end, that's not any excuse, & that's not a guy past his prime. That's a guy whose heart can be questioned.
"Fenech would have got KO'd," aren't you English? Is that how you speak the Mother Tongue? Hey-Zeus!
That's nonsense. If Hamed started putting in less than 100% (which, IMO, he did) at the back-end, that's not any excuse, & that's not a guy past his prime. That's a guy whose heart can be questioned.
"Fenech would have got KO'd," aren't you English? Is that how you speak the Mother Tongue? Hey-Zeus!
Last edited by Goodnight, Irene on 17 Feb 2010, 05:40, edited 1 time in total.
Re: hamed v fenech
Goodnight, Irene wrote:Getting lazy & neglecting your craft doesn't mean you're, "past your peak."
That's nonsense. If Hamed started putting in less than 100% (which, IMO, he did) at the back-end, that's not any excuse, & that's not a guy past his prime. That's a guy who's heart can be questioned.
"Fenech would have got KO'd," aren't you English? Is that how you speak the Mother Tongue? Hey-Zeus!
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: hamed v fenech
A right bit thick in the noggin', aye!
Oooh, he knocked out Kevin Kelley! Fenech beat the snot out of Azumah Nelson, FFS. Nationalistic dolt
Oooh, he knocked out Kevin Kelley! Fenech beat the snot out of Azumah Nelson, FFS. Nationalistic dolt
-
oliverfennell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 5564
- Joined: 15 Feb 2007, 06:37
Re: hamed v fenech
Let's seek American opinion on this one. Justified or not, any British or Australian opinion is going to bring with it assumptions of bias.
Any takers?
Any takers?
Re: hamed v fenech
Calvin Grove ko'd him ffs its just my opinion that Hamed wins i just dont think Fenech was all that good and i have seen him fight a few times and Kelly would have given Fenech all the trouble he could handle if not beaten himGoodnight, Irene wrote:A right bit thick in the noggin', aye!
Oooh, he knocked out Kevin Kelley! Fenech beat the snot out of Azumah Nelson, FFS. Nationalistic dolt
-
BO Selecta
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 140
- Joined: 11 Dec 2005, 11:01
Re: hamed v fenech
Hamed -v- Fenech is a FW Foreman -v- Frazier.
Fenech's relentless style would see him end up in all kinds of trouble against the mega powerful Hamed.
Now, don't get me wrong, Hamed is not ominpotent or anything remotely close, but he is all wrong for someone like Fenech.
Hamed by TKO IMHO.
Fenech's relentless style would see him end up in all kinds of trouble against the mega powerful Hamed.
Now, don't get me wrong, Hamed is not ominpotent or anything remotely close, but he is all wrong for someone like Fenech.
Hamed by TKO IMHO.
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: hamed v fenech
I'll go along with that. It's too bad people can't realise how little I think of both men out of the ring. Fenech is a thug & absolute scumbag, & Hamed always was obnoxious trash.oliverfennell wrote:Let's seek American opinion on this one. Justified or not, any British or Australian opinion is going to bring with it assumptions of bias.
Any takers?
What say the Yanks?