Should Naz be inducted into the IBHOF?

[Newport Daz]

The names for induction into the "class" of 2012 are out and include Tommy Hearns, Prince Nassem, Donald Curry, Dariusz Michealchewski and Sven Ottke!!!! amongst others. Obviously there's no discussion required for the Hitman, but what about Naz?

He beat some very good fighters in Robinson, Medina, Johnson, Kelley, McCulloch, Ingle, Soto, Bungu and Sanchez. Politics aside would have held IBF, WBO and WBC belts at the same time. He had incredible power, speed and reflexes and was almost untouchable in his prime.

But - in the biggest fight of his life he was beaten relatively easily by MAB, had one more fight that stunk the place out and disappeared.

On other American based websites, they are in almost univeral agreement. Naz is no HOF'er - he was good not great.
In my opinion he should be in.

What's your thoughts?

[Emmseegee]

Im extremely biased when it comes to Naz, id put him in there no problem.
If Stallone can get in then so can Naz, he sparked boxing off in the UK again, got people interested and done the business.
I can safely say that without Naz there is no doubt i would not be a boxing fan... He got me hooked.

The man was an entertainer.....

[youngrell]

Based on the word FAME, he should definitely go in, he lit up boxing like no other during his time and nobody since has come close either. HE was also a top class operator so it's a no brainer for me!

[MightyWarrior]

Yes for Naz, first million dollar featherweight and rightly so. Brought massive excitement to the sport and once seen never forgoten.

[Terminator666]

The problem is the criteria-- This is why a case for most boxers can always be made. May as well put him in there then.

[stevieb_8006]

def should get in.so unfair hes judged on 1 single fight. hes better than loads already in.

also, gatti will breeze in no questions asked and naz was better and acheived nore than him.

[Ketchel]

def should get in.so unfair hes judged on 1 single fight. hes better than loads already in.

also, gatti will breeze in no questions asked and naz was better and acheived nore than him.

I don't think he is judged solely on just the fight with Barrera. I feel he is judged on the fact he never lived up to all the predictions of greatness he and others around him made. It is perceived that he underacheived on his potential. It seemed that money became more important to him than maintaining his skills. It's this perception that is hurting him.

To me based on what he did acheive in the ring I think he is as deserving as many already in the HOF.

[ShadrachSimmo]

I agree with the general concensus. He should be inducted. Alot of people maybe still look at him as an underachiever because he was so talented and could have done so much more. I think it's a no brainer get him in.

[Wrists]

If Barry McGuigan got in (and this is not a pop at Barry) then a featherweight whose accomplishments in the ring are better as well as the added charisma he brought to the sport then Naz should be a shoe in.

An absolute shoe in

[Quixall]

It would have been good to see what Naz would have been like if he had retained the same style that he had when he first started and fought the likes of Robinson and Medina. Back then he combined the power and flamboyance with a pragmatic approach which meant that he tried to stick to the basics of hitting and not being hit in return. As his career progressed he became more and more one dimensional and obssesive about his power. He had some tough fights against Sanchez and Kelley, particularly the Sanchez fight where he got quite badly marked up. Once the fight with Barrera came round, he wasn't training correctly, had too many yes men around him and was deep into the fame trap and circus that was surrounding him. It's always an argument that even if Naz had retained and honed that earlier style, as he progressed through the rankings, he would have met people who could have negated his skills, because he was more unorthadox than talented. I personally think that he would have faired a lot better had he kept up the earlier style and could have beaten Barrera, but a one dimensional Naz could never beat Barrera and that's what he was by the time he came to the biggest fight of his career. Naz could have moved up quite a few weights and it's a pity he didn't fight either Morales or Marquez and even Mayweather called him out at one time. A very exciting fighter and one of my favourites, but in the end his career flatlined and never attained the recognition because of it.

[flatnoseflynn]

Hamed, was great to watch coming up through the ranks and some good fights as the champ. The ring entrances and entertaintment he brought to boxing was brillant. he Let himself down a bit at the end but he just lost his hunger which happens. Should he be inducted into the BHOF?......Well, if Mcguigan got in then it's a big fat YES for me.

[bripez]

Hamed, was great to watch coming up through the ranks and some good fights as the champ. The ring entrances and entertaintment he brought to boxing was brillant. he Let himself down a bit at the end but he just lost his hunger which happens. Should he be inducted into the BHOF?......Well, if Mcguigan got in then it's a big fat YES for me.

I too agree with the McGuigan comment (although I was a big fan of his and this is not a pop at Mcguigan).

Where I disagree is with the loss of hunger which I am not sure about. What separates the really good from the great is not that they remain unbeaten, but it is how they come back from their defeats.

Naz's reaction to his defeat shows that he is not a "great" in my opinion.

[gizmo1]

A definite yes (for his entrances alone!).

[Jon Saxon]

Shoe in on results alone.

[rhino222]

i think Naz deserves to be in there, if nothing else he brought a new style to the top level (yes we had bomber etc before but no one from inglebank took it to the top like naz did)

naz style was so unique that at times i was actually surprised when a punch was landed on him!.. im sure i am not the only one. at his height in the peak of his career naz had the power of a middleweight and was virtually un-taggable. simply awesome. add this to the showmanship and razzamatazz (forget the allah muslim stuff that it turned into!!!) and he definately deserves to be in there.

[wesley05]

For me YES bigtime he was a massive credit to british boxing when he was knocking out every top featherweight there was. Also he was a top top entertainer no one has come close since to the PRINCE one word LEGEND.

[hitman_hatton1]

in terms of his impact on the sport.

yes.

in real fighting terms.

falls short.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brha42VKlCk

upped quite a few naz vids on me channel.

[hitman_hatton1]

For me YES bigtime he was a massive credit to british boxing when he was knocking out every top featherweight there was. Also he was a top top entertainer no one has come close since to the PRINCE one word LEGEND.

except for morales, marquez, norwood, espinoza (who admittedly weren't interested), gainer.

[JimJim2009]

Yes, but if Ottke is inducted then the IBHOF is a fxxking laughing stock. Why should a stay-at-home German, who fought mainly hand picked opposition and avoided his contemporaries, and who benefited from favourable home-town decisions, join the legends of the sport ?

If the Boxing Hall of Fame is meant to be the Oscars, then "champs" like Ottke should be in the Razzies, not the Oscars.

Rant over

[jamesmcdonnell]

The names for induction into the "class" of 2012 are out and include Tommy Hearns, Prince Nassem, Donald Curry, Dariusz Michealchewski and Sven Ottke!!!! amongst others. Obviously there's no discussion required for the Hitman, but what about Naz?

He beat some very good fighters in Robinson, Medina, Johnson, Kelley, McCulloch, Ingle, Soto, Bungu and Sanchez. Politics aside would have held IBF, WBO and WBC belts at the same time. He had incredible power, speed and reflexes and was almost untouchable in his prime.

But - in the biggest fight of his life he was beaten relatively easily by MAB, had one more fight that stunk the place out and disappeared.

On other American based websites, they are in almost univeral agreement. Naz is no HOF'er - he was good not great.
In my opinion he should be in.

What's your thoughts?

To be fair to Ottke, he was insanely popular in his home country, and a long serving champion. I couldn't stand him, but give him his due.....

Hamed, no trouble, massively popular, and made a huge impact in the USA when he went there.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Yes, but if Ottke is inducted then the IBHOF is a fxxking laughing stock. Why should a stay-at-home German, who fought mainly hand picked opposition and avoided his contemporaries, and who benefited from favourable home-town decisions, join the legends of the sport ?

If the Boxing Hall of Fame is meant to be the Oscars, then "champs" like Ottke should be in the Razzies, not the Oscars.

Rant over

Wait a minute now, he fought quite a few decent contenders that Calzaghe didnt tackle until afterwards.

Let's not get carried away here.

[JimJim2009]

I think I've woke up in a parallel universe where shit is great and great is shit.... if Sven Ottke can even be considered for the Boxing Hall Of FAME I give up, I honestly do !!! Fxxk it then, next year lets make room for Terry Marsh, he retired undefeated too...

(Mind you, Marsh might warrant inclusion more for his for actions outside the ring than in it)

Good luck to Ottke, its a business afterall and he must have retired a wealthy man but jesus h christ surely his championship reign is not hall of fame material ?

Anyway back to the thread, yes Naz should be in there. What a shame he never did fight Marquez, considering what Marquez has gone on to achieve... Marquez was his long-time number one contender and Naz was reputed to have ducked him. Not saying thats true, but its been said. Looking back, I bet Naz would have loved to have recorded a win over him..

[keithmoonhangover]

Tommy Hearns, Prince Nassem, Donald Curry and Dariusz Michealchewski all make it in for me.

Michealchewski is a modern great IMHO and is constantly underrated.

[JimJim2009]

To be fair to Ottke, he was insanely popular in his home country, and a long serving champion. I couldn't stand him, but give him his due.....

Hamed, no trouble, massively popular, and made a huge impact in the USA when he went there.[/quote]

But its Germany we're talking about, the country that worshipped and idolised David Hasselhoff as a rock icon Nobody else in the boxing world was remotely bothered about Ottke, nobody was buying/selling tapes of his fights, marvelling about his performances and looking forward to the next time he fought, these are not the exclusive criteria by which to judge a hall of famer but when you talk about Tommy Hearns or Naz Hamed, they travelled, they fought away from home, they won and lost against top contemporary fighters, featured in thrilling battles, and so on.

Sorry I'm going to leave this alone now or my brain will melt but I've always regarded Ottke as a shining glittering example of what's wrong with the sport.

[reggaereggae]

Sorry if this has already been stated, but what do theIBHOF regard as criteria for fighters? Without knowing that; In terms of impact and popularity, Hamed was big news. In terms of boxing achievement, he unified the title and beat a lot of quality fighters. In terms of bringing to attention boxing to the Arab world he also did exceptionally. Without knowing the exact criteria his case seems very strong