Prince Naseem V Salvador Sanchez

britpack · Post by **britpack** » 18 Sep 2005, 23:19

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:britpack wrote

yeah but he didnt have the solid defence like barrera did. i think when he takes a few clean licks, he would have gone down. i think naz knocks out barrera when he was 23. naz had a solid chin (underrated coz of his balance) and when he mixed it up, he could take anybody out. sanchez isnt impossible because he lost his mexican title fight. he had his flaws too. naz in his prime (23) could have ko'd any featherweight or small guy from any era. even jimmy wilde

ok ur love for hamed goes way beyond his fighting ability. i wouldnt rate hamed in my top 15 featherweights of all time. u saw he was overhyped and when he stepped up to fight a great fighter, he was taken to school and given a boxing lesson. and hamed was only 27, he was very much in his prime against MAB.

why is this even a topic????? Salvadore sanchez would pick apart hamed and KO hamed in mid rounds.

even morales couldnt beat barrera so what is your point? he was clearly past his best because he was an early bloomer. thats why he was fighting the best while barrera was fighting guys bums at bantamweight. they were all scared of naz until they saw the sppeed and reflexes disappear. when they saw him walking around at 12 stone they got brave (yes it is nothing new and it happened when he was 25). MAB is an all time great anyway and he would have beaten sanchez on points. sanchez was flawed and would give naz a punchers chance. in fact he would give him more than just a chance. by the way, sanchez was over-rated too. they hav a saying in the entertainment industry ''death sells''

britpack · Post by **britpack** » 18 Sep 2005, 23:28

Sherlock wrote:
britpack wrote:
Seamus wrote:Hamed was made for Salvador Sanchez. Naz's style was perfect for one of the greatest counterpunchers of all time. Sanchez either by late stoppage or a very wide decision.
yeah but he didnt have the solid defence like barrera did. i think when he takes a few clean licks, he would have gone down. i think naz knocks out barrera when he was 23. naz had a solid chin (underrated coz of his balance) and when he mixed it up, he could take anybody out. sanchez isnt impossible because he lost his mexican title fight. he had his flaws too. naz in his prime (23) could have ko'd any featherweight or small guy from any era. even jimmy wilde
Jimmy Wilde was a flyweight, only weighing about 105-112lbs, which would give him 10-20 pounds advantage. Even with that, Wilde would wipe the floor with Hamed. And I seriously doubt Naz kayoes any featherweight from any era, he couldn't beat the best of his own era, Barrera.

jimmy wilde finished his career as a bantamweight. and yes he probably would wipe the floor with hamed. he would wipe the floor with anybody. at one time he was regarded as the best pound for pound boxer ever. he makes most peoples top ten list. he is the next level and would kill sanchez, barrera and morales too. they all started as flyweights so i thought it was worht a mention. i still think hamed has a punchers chance, even against a legend like wilde. hamed has a puchers chance with any featherweight from any generation. i think he is the biggest punching fighter at that weight ever and therefore deserves a top 5 spot

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 19 Sep 2005, 02:27

I spoke with my father today about this topic, I thought I might share his opinion. Personally i'd never say something so offensive but I thought it was a bit funny. My father is a Mexican man who's followed boxing for 63 years. He can't speak English very well, but when he gets riled up he'll say a funny thing or two. When I said, in Spanish of course, "Dad there's some people that compare Hamed with Sanchez. Some even say Hamed could have beaten Sanchez.. what do you think?" He replied angrily, and personally I thought his words were true, his exact words are the following, "BULLSHIT!" Then he proceeded to say in Spanish, "Anyone who says that is an ignorant fool who doesn't know shit about boxing. I bet it was some crazy fan who doesn't know shit about boxing. If Barrera clearly dominated Hamed, Sanchez would have near killed him." He then said, "Son, if some someone told me that Hamed would beat Sanchez, I'd just agree and walk a way, it's not even worth arguing with such an ignorant person." Now I don't mean it any offensive way, but that's 63 years of boxing knowledge for you. So i'm going to follow my dad's advice and steer clear from this thread because, I know the truth of the matter is Sanchez would have outclassed Hamed.

You can argue as much as you want, but most people will agree with what I say. And of course, I try not to be as offensive as my dad, but it was a bit funny to hear him say bullshit. Thought i'd share the story. I wouldn't say go so far as to say you're ignorant, I'd just say you should watch Sanchez before you compare him to Hamed. Hamed was a great fighter with raw talent, but he just began to rely too much on his power in my own opinion, ultimately causing him to get outboxed by the more experienced Barrera. Sanchez however, was the best counterpuncher i've ever seen and a top 10 counterpuncher on anybody's all time counterpunchers list. At least anybody that knows about boxing. I wonder if anyone has him below top 10.

jyuza · Post by **jyuza** » 19 Sep 2005, 04:35

Thx to your Daddy for that cause that's exactly what i think.
I don't have 63 years of boxing knowledge, but i do have some interest in Sanchez.
There's no hell way that naz could have beat salvador sanchez in any type of fight. Naz is propably one of the best featherweight ever but Sanchez is simply too much for him jusst like Hopkins was to Tito trinidad (just an example but i think sanchez would have KO'd naz in the early round).
And, IMO, Sanchez will stay as one of the best counterpuncher ever seen in boxing.
Like i said to my friend vagabundo, i don't think we will see fighters like him again.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 19 Sep 2005, 05:57

Naz had a great punch and good skills when he won the title but then slowly he seemed to neglect his skills, just rely on his power and he stopped improving. MAB seems to ahve always been learning his craft and honing his skills.

Naz has a punchers chance but I'd back Sanchez, Pedroza and Nelson to beat him. I think McGuigan would have beat him too, although I think this would have been a hell of a fight.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 19 Sep 2005, 07:00

vagabundo55 wrote:I spoke with my father today about this topic, I thought I might share his opinion. Personally i'd never say something so offensive but I thought it was a bit funny. My father is a Mexican man who's followed boxing for 63 years. He can't speak English very well, but when he gets riled up he'll say a funny thing or two. When I said, in Spanish of course, "Dad there's some people that compare Hamed with Sanchez. Some even say Hamed could have beaten Sanchez.. what do you think?" He replied angrily, and personally I thought his words were true, his exact words are the following, "BULLSHIT!" Then he proceeded to say in Spanish, "Anyone who says that is an ignorant fool who doesn't know shit about boxing. I bet it was some crazy fan who doesn't know shit about boxing. If Barrera clearly dominated Hamed, Sanchez would have near killed him." He then said, "Son, if some someone told me that Hamed would beat Sanchez, I'd just agree and walk a way, it's not even worth arguing with such an ignorant person." Now I don't mean it any offensive way, but that's 63 years of boxing knowledge for you. So i'm going to follow my dad's advice and steer clear from this thread because, I know the truth of the matter is Sanchez would have outclassed Hamed. You can argue as much as you want, but most people will agree with what I say. And of course, I try not to be as offensive as my dad, but it was a bit funny to hear him say bullshit. Thought i'd share the story. I wouldn't say go so far as to say you're ignorant, I'd just say you should watch Sanchez before you compare him to Hamed. Hamed was a great fighter with raw talent, but he just began to rely too much on his power in my own opinion, ultimately causing him to get outboxed by the more experienced Barrera. Sanchez however, was the best counterpuncher i've ever seen and a top 10 counterpuncher on anybody's all time counterpunchers list. At least anybody that knows about boxing. I wonder if anyone has him below top 10.

I agree totally. Sanchez is one of the best boxers I've ever seen and would have destroyed Hamed. Shame there are posters around like Brit and Ringsider who don't know shit about anything. They should be locked in a room together and have the key thrown away!.... 8)

Gordon · Post by **Gordon** » 19 Sep 2005, 07:48

LOL

I've being reading this post with a little smile on my face.

I have already posted on another thread re:- Hamed.

Prince Naseem Hamed, like Mike Tyson got big headed and blew it big time. He got too carried away with his KO victories, he started to treat ppl with contempt and in the end he got blown away. OK maybe not in the way Douglas did to Tyson, but never the less he got beat.

Now where is he?

His head has got jammed so far up his own ass he can't even come back from a points loss Barrera. No shame in that loss, every TRUE GREAT has come back from a loss.

But to compare him with someone like Salvador Sanchez is plain foolish.

I am one Brit who Knows a shitload about boxing over my 44 yrs on this planet and in no way would Hamed have done a number on Sanchez.

There were some great featherweigths, in my time who would have beaten Hamed, and yes some woulded have handed him his head on a silver plate. Salvador Sanchez was just one

Prince Naseem Hamed was good whilst he trained, before he became complacent and too full of his own shit.

I detest when I hear American guys coming on here talking shit about how we Brits know nothing about this sport because someone who has the hots for a particular fighter gets a bit over zealous.

There are guys on here who shout their mouths off regarding other fighters who IMO were over-rated

We all have our own favourite fighters and will back them to the hilt, even though we may be seeing things through rose coloured specs.

I don't agree with slagging off other nations on here. We are here to debate BOXING

For the record Sanchez to KO Hamed after the 8th

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 19 Sep 2005, 14:31

There are plenty of British boxing fans with great knowledge. Brit's just not one of them apparently. For the record though, I have to say I have met a few British people whom I consider some of the most knowledgeable boxing fans. But like in all countries there are a few deluded fans who believe their countryman would have destroyed anybody.

cabritox · Post by **cabritox** » 19 Sep 2005, 17:20

what the fack all u guys talking about!! Sal Sanchez easily beats Naz by KO. fornicate all those british, Naz doesnt even have the guts to face Sanchez. he would be outclassed! :x

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 19 Sep 2005, 18:57

britpack wrote

thats why barrera opted not to take any wallops against an old fat naseem.

i didnt know 27 years old is old???

britpack wrote

kevik kelly wasnt old if you knew what was what

kelly was 30, and was showing signs of aging. how could u say a 27 year old hamed is old, then say a 30 year old kevin kelly isnt??

barry · Post by **barry** » 28 Sep 2005, 04:36

I've always defended Hamed against a lot of unjust criticism, but sorry...no way does Hamed beat Sanchez! I glanced over several posts on this thread and noticed one that said Sanchez was not real tight defensively, or something to that effect...I suggest that person actually watch some films of Sanchez because just looking at his record will not, nor can it tell you how he fought. If he had been just tjhe least bit weak defensively Danny Lopez would have taken him out and if not Lopez, then sharp-shotting Wilfredo Gomez most certainly would have, but Sanchez put it all over both of those guys three times. I think Hamed was one of the hardest punching featherweights ever, but Sanchez would have put him through school even better than Barrera did!

jyuza · Post by **jyuza** » 28 Sep 2005, 06:31

barry wrote:I've always defended Hamed against a lot of unjust criticism, but sorry...no way does Hamed beat Sanchez! I glanced over several posts on this thread and noticed one that said Sanchez was not real tight defensively, or something to that effect...I suggest that person actually watch some films of Sanchez because just looking at his record will not, nor can it tell you how he fought. If he had been just tjhe least bit weak defensively Danny Lopez would have taken him out and if not Lopez, then sharp-shotting Wilfredo Gomez most certainly would have, but Sanchez put it all over both of those guys three times. I think Hamed was one of the hardest punching featherweights ever, but Sanchez would have put him through school even better than Barrera did!

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 28 Sep 2005, 09:18

Sanchez had a very good defence but could stand and slug it out if he wanted... he had a great chin... I'm not sure but I don't think he was ever floored as a pro. Even if Hamed tagged Sanchez it would make no difference as Salvadore took punches from Lopez, Gomez and Nelson (all of whom I think had comparable power to Hamed imo) with no problem.

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 28 Sep 2005, 14:01

He was down only once in his career. He would never be knocked down again though.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 28 Sep 2005, 14:14

vagabundo55 wrote:He was down only once in his career. He would never be knocked down again though.

What fight was it that he was knocked down in?.... it must of been one of his early fights?....

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 28 Sep 2005, 18:40

I remember reading it was in the first round during his fight with Antonio Becerra. I double checked Boxrec to see if anything was mentioned, but apparently it was not in his fight against Becerra it was according to Boxrec, in the fifth round against Juan Escobar. I could have sworn I read that he was only knocked down once though.. I may have been wrong about the Becerra fight though. His knockdown may have been against Escobar although I remember reading somewhere that he was knocked down in the first round against Becerra. Can someone verify this? Anyway, his knocked downs were in his early fights when he was young and inexperienced. After his draw with Escobar, Sanchez applied himself more. However, I think Danny Lopez and Wilfredo Gomez both hit harder than Hamed. Sanchez was not KO'd by either of them, or knocked down for that matter. I doubt Hamed would be able to land at will against Sanchez. Hope that clears things up about the knockdown Silkov!

(Although now i'm wondering whether it was Escobar or Becerra who knocked Sanchez down..)

britpack · Post by **britpack** » 28 Sep 2005, 18:42

vagabundo55 wrote:I spoke with my father today about this topic, I thought I might share his opinion. Personally i'd never say something so offensive but I thought it was a bit funny. My father is a Mexican man who's followed boxing for 63 years. He can't speak English very well, but when he gets riled up he'll say a funny thing or two. When I said, in Spanish of course, "Dad there's some people that compare Hamed with Sanchez. Some even say Hamed could have beaten Sanchez.. what do you think?" He replied angrily, and personally I thought his words were true, his exact words are the following, "BULLSHIT!" Then he proceeded to say in Spanish, "Anyone who says that is an ignorant fool who doesn't know shit about boxing. I bet it was some crazy fan who doesn't know shit about boxing. If Barrera clearly dominated Hamed, Sanchez would have near killed him." He then said, "Son, if some someone told me that Hamed would beat Sanchez, I'd just agree and walk a way, it's not even worth arguing with such an ignorant person." Now I don't mean it any offensive way, but that's 63 years of boxing knowledge for you. So i'm going to follow my dad's advice and steer clear from this thread because, I know the truth of the matter is Sanchez would have outclassed Hamed. You can argue as much as you want, but most people will agree with what I say. And of course, I try not to be as offensive as my dad, but it was a bit funny to hear him say bullshit. Thought i'd share the story. I wouldn't say go so far as to say you're ignorant, I'd just say you should watch Sanchez before you compare him to Hamed. Hamed was a great fighter with raw talent, but he just began to rely too much on his power in my own opinion, ultimately causing him to get outboxed by the more experienced Barrera. Sanchez however, was the best counterpuncher i've ever seen and a top 10 counterpuncher on anybody's all time counterpunchers list. At least anybody that knows about boxing. I wonder if anyone has him below top 10.

63 years of objective boxing knowledge? you said he was a mexican and we know how passionate they are. years mean nothing. ive seen both of their careers from beginning to end and can categorically state that at 23, naz would have ko'd barrera quicker than junior jones did. thats why barrera turned down millions to fight him in england. by the time the fight was made, naz had dimished skills, threw no combos and thought his money punches would bail him out.

ive also seen sanchez's career from beginning to end, and quite frankly he isn't as good as barrera so what is your point? just coz barrera beat naz (and morales!) it doesn't mean he is a free for all. junior jones beat barrera, and jones was beaten by mckinney who was ko'd by bungu and bungu was ko'd by naz in 4. it didn't make a difference in face to face comp, so dont even go on about the barrera fight.

my reasons for believing naz has a PUNCHERS CHANCE against sanchez is because sanchez likes to counter from up close. to beat naz you need to counter punch and stand back 9like barrera did). any other way and you know what happened to the other 36 guys. sanchez is no spuerman either. tell that to your dad. ive seen him from start to end and he lost at national level. he had weaknesses and if he lived longer they would have been exposed. he's just a myth immortalised like bruce lee, kurt cobain and elvis. i think this fight would have been closer than the barrera fight which wasn't a complete whitewash anyway! you can't counter punch naz from up close. he will knock you out. he was the strongest featherweight ever! no man test!!!!

britpack · Post by **britpack** » 28 Sep 2005, 18:47

danny lopez and wilfredo gomez do not hit harder than naz. they did not create as many early knockouts and one punch knockouts against elite opposition. in fact they didn't even do it against bums and chumps! forget champs like vasquez, kelly and johnson. them guys couldn't fell journeymen the way naz did. you will find it very hard to find tapes of them producing as many devastating ko's as naz. lets not be bullshitting haters. lets admit that sanchez never faced that kind of power before. and he can't render him naz's power impotent by standing back and boxing, because he liked marching forward and countering. sometimes he use to take shots in order to counter. against naz, he would be walking into a trap.

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 28 Sep 2005, 19:07

Well, honestly, there's no way to change my opinion just like there's no way to change yours so there's no point in arguing. Most people will agree with me though. That doesn't mean i'm correct. However, it does mean that you think differently. There's nothing wrong with that. It just means that we have something more to talk about. But as i've said before, my opinion doesn't change Sanchez TKO's Hamed. I'm not trying to convince you, i'm just stating my opinion.

As for the comment on my father.. well, it doesn't take a Mexican to realize Sanchez would beat Hamed. It doesn't take 63 years of experience either... I'm just saying that 63 years of "Mexican" experience says Sanchez beats Hamed. Most boxing enthusiasts with knowledge on both Hamed and Sanchez would pick Sanchez to win.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 28 Sep 2005, 20:34

britpack wrote

lets admit that sanchez never faced that kind of power before

im pretty sure sanchez fought danny lopez twice???? i believe he hit as hard as hamed.

-hamed has no shot against sanchez

- hamed didnt face elite competetion

- hamed was nearly knocked out by an aging kevin kelley

- the only good fighter hamed fought was MAB and he was given a boxing lesson. hames was 27 and in his prime

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 29 Sep 2005, 04:20

There is only a puncher's chance for Naz. Sanchez is the best featehrweigth of the last 30 years. I was really quite disappointed by Sanchez-Gomez. It was one of the most eagerly awaited fights of its era and beforehand looked like a real toss up as to who would win. It wasn't even that comeptitive. Sanchez beat him quite easily. From the first round the result never looked in doubt and Gomez was possibly the greatest ever Jr Feather champ.

Naz as an entertaining guy but he'd have lost to Sanchez, Arguello, Pedroza, Nelson, Mitchell, Barrera, Marquez, Morales...

More competitive fights would have been McGuigan, Pacquiano, Lopez, Laporte, Lockridge, Bernard Taylor, Gomez

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 29 Sep 2005, 06:20

Ezzard wrote:There is only a puncher's chance for Naz. Sanchez is the best featehrweigth of the last 30 years. I was really quite disappointed by Sanchez-Gomez. It was one of the most eagerly awaited fights of its era and beforehand looked like a real toss up as to who would win. It wasn't even that comeptitive. Sanchez beat him quite easily. From the first round the result never looked in doubt and Gomez was possibly the greatest ever Jr Feather champ.

Naz as an entertaining guy but he'd have lost to Sanchez, Arguello, Pedroza, Nelson, Mitchell, Barrera, Marquez, Morales...

More competitive fights would have been McGuigan, Pacquiano, Lopez, Laporte, Lockridge, Bernard Taylor, Gomez

Hamed was greatly overrated imo... he was really in a different league to the likes of Gomez, Nelson, Lopez and ofcourse Sanchez.
I love the Sanchez vs Gomez fight as its a sensational performance by Salvadore and Gomez gives an equally brilliant performance of courage and never gives up. Had Sanchez not been such a great fighter Gomez could have turned that fight around.

jyuza · Post by **jyuza** » 29 Sep 2005, 06:35

silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote:There is only a puncher's chance for Naz. Sanchez is the best featehrweigth of the last 30 years. I was really quite disappointed by Sanchez-Gomez. It was one of the most eagerly awaited fights of its era and beforehand looked like a real toss up as to who would win. It wasn't even that comeptitive. Sanchez beat him quite easily. From the first round the result never looked in doubt and Gomez was possibly the greatest ever Jr Feather champ.

Naz as an entertaining guy but he'd have lost to Sanchez, Arguello, Pedroza, Nelson, Mitchell, Barrera, Marquez, Morales...

More competitive fights would have been McGuigan, Pacquiano, Lopez, Laporte, Lockridge, Bernard Taylor, Gomez
Hamed was greatly overrated imo... he was really in a different league to the likes of Gomez, Nelson, Lopez and ofcourse Sanchez.
I love the Sanchez vs Gomez fight as its a sensational performance by Salvadore and Gomez gives an equally brilliant performance of courage and never gives up. Had Sanchez not been such a great fighter Gomez could have turned that fight around.

Exactly.
And i heard somewhere that gomez ruled the division after sanchez.
Now i need to confirm it.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 29 Sep 2005, 06:57

silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote:There is only a puncher's chance for Naz. Sanchez is the best featehrweigth of the last 30 years. I was really quite disappointed by Sanchez-Gomez. It was one of the most eagerly awaited fights of its era and beforehand looked like a real toss up as to who would win. It wasn't even that comeptitive. Sanchez beat him quite easily. From the first round the result never looked in doubt and Gomez was possibly the greatest ever Jr Feather champ.

Naz as an entertaining guy but he'd have lost to Sanchez, Arguello, Pedroza, Nelson, Mitchell, Barrera, Marquez, Morales...

More competitive fights would have been McGuigan, Pacquiano, Lopez, Laporte, Lockridge, Bernard Taylor, Gomez

Hamed was greatly overrated imo... he was really in a different league to the likes of Gomez, Nelson, Lopez and ofcourse Sanchez.
I love the Sanchez vs Gomez fight as its a sensational performance by Salvadore and Gomez gives an equally brilliant performance of courage and never gives up. Had Sanchez not been such a great fighter Gomez could have turned that fight around.

Gomez never seemed the same fighter once he moved up and often seemed disinterested. I seem to remember there was talk of Mcguigan moving up to figth Gomez at some point but he took the Cruz figth instead. I'm sure Silkov will correct me on this if I'm wrong.

I don't think Gomez is a certain to beat Naz. BUT I would back Gomez out of the 2 but it's not cut and dry like the first list of fighters I made. What really bothers me about Naz was how easily he accepted MAB mastering him. I really thought he'd go for broke in the final rounds but he just continued doing very little. I don't think he could have turned the fight around because I don't think he was good enough.

I really like Lopez but I don't think he sits next to Sanchez, Nelson, Pedroza etc either. Again, I think a fight with Naz would be quite close.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 29 Sep 2005, 07:25

Ezzard wrote:
silkov wrote:
Ezzard wrote:There is only a puncher's chance for Naz. Sanchez is the best featehrweigth of the last 30 years. I was really quite disappointed by Sanchez-Gomez. It was one of the most eagerly awaited fights of its era and beforehand looked like a real toss up as to who would win. It wasn't even that comeptitive. Sanchez beat him quite easily. From the first round the result never looked in doubt and Gomez was possibly the greatest ever Jr Feather champ.

Naz as an entertaining guy but he'd have lost to Sanchez, Arguello, Pedroza, Nelson, Mitchell, Barrera, Marquez, Morales...

More competitive fights would have been McGuigan, Pacquiano, Lopez, Laporte, Lockridge, Bernard Taylor, Gomez

Hamed was greatly overrated imo... he was really in a different league to the likes of Gomez, Nelson, Lopez and ofcourse Sanchez.
I love the Sanchez vs Gomez fight as its a sensational performance by Salvadore and Gomez gives an equally brilliant performance of courage and never gives up. Had Sanchez not been such a great fighter Gomez could have turned that fight around.
Gomez never seemed the same fighter once he moved up and often seemed disinterested. I seem to remember there was talk of Mcguigan moving up to figth Gomez at some point but he took the Cruz figth instead. I'm sure Silkov will correct me on this if I'm wrong.

I don't think Gomez is a certain to beat Naz. BUT I would back Gomez out of the 2 but it's not cut and dry like the first list of fighters I made. What really bothers me about Naz was how easily he accepted MAB mastering him. I really thought he'd go for broke in the final rounds but he just continued doing very little. I don't think he could have turned the fight around because I don't think he was good enough.

I really like Lopez but I don't think he sits next to Sanchez, Nelson, Pedroza etc either. Again, I think a fight with Naz would be quite close.

After his loss to Sanchez Wilfredo went back down to 122 and had a real thriller with Lupe Pintor. He then after a few other fights moved back up to 126 and won the title from Laporte at which point he was really already past his best but still a formiddable fighter. Gomez at his best would have had far too much for Hamed. Same with Danny Lopez. One thing that really hampered Hamed when he stepped up in class was that he tended to rely on one punch to end things while the likes of Gomez, Lopez, Sanchez and Nelson were all great combination punchers.
Noone mentiones Azhuma Nelsons power much but he had very heavy hands who can forget the way he koed Cowdell and Jim Mcdonnell. After the way Hamed was dominated by Barrera and struggled against a faded Kevin Kelley I think Lopez, Sanchez, Gomez and Nelson would all have had pretty clear cut wins against him.

Prince Naseem V Salvador Sanchez

re

Re: re

gomez! hahah