Prime Naz v Adrien Broner who wins ???

[thepocketrocket]

As for the thread, lets have a look at Broner in a few years, we know nothing about him yet.

The decline was certainly a protracted process which lasted a good few years. The weaknesses in Naz seemed to grow proportionally with his growing distraction and loss of dedication - the longer it went on, the weaker he got. The prime years of his career went to waste. He was a young man when he stopped fighting but he hadn't developed for years and he had lost much of what he once had, much the same as Mike Tyson after Buster Douglas, when he became preoccupied with landing big punches but neglected what once set those punches up and made them so effective. Naz did exactly that.

Oh, I agree that Naz got obsessed with power, and he became a parody of himself. But I do stick to the fact that pure reflex fighters struggle with longevity more than orthodox fighters for the reasons I mentioned. This, for me, was a huge contributery factor to Naz's decline, and often overlooked. Those who deny it are the same people who think that if he had trained properly he would have blasted Barrera out in three, easy-peasy. It was always more complicated than that, a bigger picture.

I actually think there was a huge article in BM about it. If it was BN ignore me.

[Deserter]

But I do stick to the fact that pure reflex fighters struggle with longevity more than orthodox fighters for the reasons I mentioned.

I don't think anyone is denying this, but my point is that Hamed's decline from his peak happened way before he started reaching the stage of his reflexes slowing. He was still only about 23/24 when he was facing Kevin Kelley et all, and there's no way on earth you'd expect a fighter's reflexes to start betraying him at that point from a physiological perspective - to give it some context, Jones Jr was in his early 30s before his reflexes started to betray him and Herol Graham was still bamboozling the likes of Rod Douglas at the age of 30.
Given this, while you can correctly state that in his later years his slowing reflexes accelerated his decline, the rot set in far earlier than that. In essence, the reflexes issue was a catalyst rather than a cause.

[thepocketrocket]

Agreed on all point Deserter.

You are correct in going back to Kelley. I'm an old fart and I remember the build up to that encounter. Kelley was seen as an ageing Yank whose name would look good on the record. Not as worn as Johnson, but not the Kelley of old. People get sticky over that fight in an act of total revisionism. I remember commenting at the time that the fact he was getting caught so frequently was a real concern. Now when you read about it, Naz was smashing up the fearsome Yank.

For me, that is the start of the rot you mention. Though by Barrera he wasn't at that physical peak. For me, Barrera won that fight, Hamed didn't throw it. Though if Naz had trained properley, he may have been more competetive

[Deserter]

Agreed on all point Deserter.

You are correct in going back to Kelley. I'm an old fart and I remember the build up to that encounter. Kelley was seen as an ageing Yank whose name would look good on the record. Not as worn as Johnson, but not the Kelley of old. People get sticky over that fight in an act of total revisionism. I remember commenting at the time that the fact he was getting caught so frequently was a real concern. Now when you read about it, Naz was smashing up the fearsome Yank.

For me, that is the start of the rot you mention. Though by Barrera he wasn't at that physical peak. For me, Barrera won that fight, Hamed didn't throw it. Though if Naz had trained properley, he may have been more competetive

Agree with all you're saying here as well Pocket - we're quickly going to have to fabricate something else to argue about as there's a genuine danger of this thread concluding with complete agreement and apprecation of each other's points, which is surely a bannable offence

[thepocketrocket]

Agreed on all point Deserter.

You are correct in going back to Kelley. I'm an old fart and I remember the build up to that encounter. Kelley was seen as an ageing Yank whose name would look good on the record. Not as worn as Johnson, but not the Kelley of old. People get sticky over that fight in an act of total revisionism. I remember commenting at the time that the fact he was getting caught so frequently was a real concern. Now when you read about it, Naz was smashing up the fearsome Yank.

For me, that is the start of the rot you mention. Though by Barrera he wasn't at that physical peak. For me, Barrera won that fight, Hamed didn't throw it. Though if Naz had trained properley, he may have been more competetive

Agree with all you're saying here as well Pocket - we're quickly going to have to fabricate something else to argue about as there's a genuine danger of this thread concluding with complete agreement and apprecation of each other's points, which is surely a bannable offence

Yeah man...this should be made a sticky thread to show how it should be done. Haha.

Ok, back to the norm...wan***

[Autobarn]

good post, b.

where the eff did this thread come from?

why on earth are brits already going overboard on broner - just because ricky burns didn't want to fight him in america? because he stopped a poor jason litzau? because he got the benefit of the doubt vs daniel ponce de leon, a dangerous guy but one of the sloppiest former champs in boxing today?

[Gray-Fox]

Broner is overrated and annoying.

HE fights like how Mayweather fought from the age 30 and onwards. Watch Mayweather when he was in his younger days and see if he fought so static.

I dunno what's wrong with all these kids copying FLoyd...really annoying.

[Khaosai-Galaxy]

Ill go with Naz, as ive never heard of the other bloke.

[Chambers2]

Not seen much of Broners chin yet, so Naz by KO (as he's a Brit)

[Glyn Leach]

Agreed on all point Deserter.

You are correct in going back to Kelley. I'm an old fart and I remember the build up to that encounter. Kelley was seen as an ageing Yank whose name would look good on the record. Not as worn as Johnson, but not the Kelley of old. People get sticky over that fight in an act of total revisionism. I remember commenting at the time that the fact he was getting caught so frequently was a real concern. Now when you read about it, Naz was smashing up the fearsome Yank.

For me, that is the start of the rot you mention. Though by Barrera he wasn't at that physical peak. For me, Barrera won that fight, Hamed didn't throw it. Though if Naz had trained properley, he may have been more competetive

Naz totally underestimated Barrera, which was a terrible mistake for a fighter on the slide. I was sitting with Naz when Barrera lost the first fight with Junior Jones. After three rounds Naz seemed genuinely confused by how badly things were going for Barerra and was asking: 'is that all he's got?' As we were leaving the post-fight press conference, Barrera was sat alone on the top table, plainly dismayed to have lost his unbeaten record. Naz went up and did the 'hard luck' think, but then added with a bit of a smirk: 'And work on blocking those right hands.' Naz was convinced he would knock Barrera out if they ever fought and at that time I thought the same thing. Oh well.

[thepocketrocket]

So would Naz have won a rematch in six months Glyn?

[Glyn Leach]

So would Naz have won a rematch in six months Glyn?

Very much doubt it, think he'd slipped too far by then. Maybe he could have rededicated himself but I think it unlikely that he would have been able to recapture the fire and hunger that was once there and made him so successful. That loss finished him.

[Autobarn]

Agreed on all point Deserter.

You are correct in going back to Kelley. I'm an old fart and I remember the build up to that encounter. Kelley was seen as an ageing Yank whose name would look good on the record. Not as worn as Johnson, but not the Kelley of old. People get sticky over that fight in an act of total revisionism. I remember commenting at the time that the fact he was getting caught so frequently was a real concern. Now when you read about it, Naz was smashing up the fearsome Yank.

For me, that is the start of the rot you mention. Though by Barrera he wasn't at that physical peak. For me, Barrera won that fight, Hamed didn't throw it. Though if Naz had trained properley, he may have been more competetive

Naz totally underestimated Barrera, which was a terrible mistake for a fighter on the slide. I was sitting with Naz when Barrera lost the first fight with Junior Jones. After three rounds Naz seemed genuinely confused by how badly things were going for Barerra and was asking: 'is that all he's got?' As we were leaving the post-fight press conference, Barrera was sat alone on the top table, plainly dismayed to have lost his unbeaten record. Naz went up and did the 'hard luck' think, but then added with a bit of a smirk: 'And work on blocking those right hands.' Naz was convinced he would knock Barrera out if they ever fought and at that time I thought the same thing. Oh well.

i remember that naz interview, with the jones-barrera report. ironically it would be naz with the defensive issues, when he fought a more compact and sensible barrera (who once seemed to takeall the "next wilfredo gonez" stuff to his head and simply tried to walk through ppl, until jr jones came along...).

[billy nelson]

Broner would be to big for Naz in my eyes. Not sure how good he will be but i think i'd slightly favour him in tis bout due to the hysical advantages alone.

Naz would toy with him and KO himwhenever he wanted,Broner so overrated not much of a defence and Naz would have exploited that

[Syntax Error]

As for the thread, lets have a look at Broner in a few years, we know nothing about him yet.

The decline was certainly a protracted process which lasted a good few years. The weaknesses in Naz seemed to grow proportionally with his growing distraction and loss of dedication - the longer it went on, the weaker he got. The prime years of his career went to waste. He was a young man when he stopped fighting but he hadn't developed for years and he had lost much of what he once had, much the same as Mike Tyson after Buster Douglas, when he became preoccupied with landing big punches but neglected what once set those punches up and made them so effective. Naz did exactly that.

Oh, I agree that Naz got obsessed with power, and he became a parody of himself. But I do stick to the fact that pure reflex fighters struggle with longevity more than orthodox fighters for the reasons I mentioned. This, for me, was a huge contributery factor to Naz's decline, and often overlooked. Those who deny it are the same people who think that if he had trained properly he would have blasted Barrera out in three, easy-peasy. It was always more complicated than that, a bigger picture.

I actually think there was a huge article in BM about it. If it was BN ignore me.

A parody of himself is an excellent way to put it.

I used to want to throw things at my telly whenever he uttered, "my power is a gift from Allah."

I initially thought he said that for effect, but increasingly, it seemed as if he believed it.

Luckily (or is that unluckily?) for him, by the time that he realised that he couldn't knock out EVERY opponent, it was too late.

Thankfully for him, he didn't stick around to get embarrassed or beaten up & retired at the right time.

[zero]

Money and his ego was what let Naz down.

[DMA1987]

If you can get Box-Buzz to add him to the SIM I'll let you all know the result next week