BARRY McGUIGAN v PRINCE NASEEM HAMED

J · Post by J » 13 Oct 2005, 08:30

pac weould hav been made for Naz in his prime, that junping in stlye leaving himself open, i coudl see an easy-ish nights work for Hamed there.

Still don think he would have beaten MAB. not smart enough.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Oct 2005, 08:55

Phoenix wrote:Hamed wins. I'd take the 95/96 version of Hamed over pretty much any feather from Mcguigans time onwards. Maybe not a prime Erik Morales (not sure thats a good matchup for Hamed). Would take that Naz over Barrera and Pacman though in a heartbeat.

IMO the Kelley fight was the start of the decline, he was terrrible in that fight until the last part of the third round when he finally found some rhythm. Kinda blew hot and cold from there onwards, looked ok against Vasquez, crap against Soto, ok against Mcullough, great against Bungu, crap against Sanchez, etc...

As I recall Hamed/Barrera was first being put together back in 1996, now that would have been a much better fight than the 2001 version.

The opinion that Hamed finally 'stepped up' against Barrera is totally incorrect. ONE THING that nobody seems to mention is from say 96/97 onwards Hamed was considered 'The Man' @ 126. Why did it take until 2001 for Barrera to leave 122 and step up to feather? Why wait 5 years to challenge The Man? Of course, revisionist history will tell you its the other way round, the featherweight champ 'ducked' a jr feather for 5 years...

Interesting post...

The reason people talk about Hamed 'stepping up' is that Barrera is undoubtedly the best fighter he ever faced. At the time, that wasn't so clear, although of course Barrera's performance against Morales showed he was far from washed up, nobody could have foretold that he was going to go on to have to have the career has has had.

why was Barrera obliged to leave Super Bantamweight and fight Hamed? What for?

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 13 Oct 2005, 09:02

why not offer both men £2million for a PPV FIGHT in 6 months time? barry v hamed. we all know that would sell out. maybe limit the fight to 6 rounds though for safety.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 13 Oct 2005, 09:16

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Phoenix wrote:Hamed wins. I'd take the 95/96 version of Hamed over pretty much any feather from Mcguigans time onwards. Maybe not a prime Erik Morales (not sure thats a good matchup for Hamed). Would take that Naz over Barrera and Pacman though in a heartbeat.

IMO the Kelley fight was the start of the decline, he was terrrible in that fight until the last part of the third round when he finally found some rhythm. Kinda blew hot and cold from there onwards, looked ok against Vasquez, crap against Soto, ok against Mcullough, great against Bungu, crap against Sanchez, etc...

As I recall Hamed/Barrera was first being put together back in 1996, now that would have been a much better fight than the 2001 version.

The opinion that Hamed finally 'stepped up' against Barrera is totally incorrect. ONE THING that nobody seems to mention is from say 96/97 onwards Hamed was considered 'The Man' @ 126. Why did it take until 2001 for Barrera to leave 122 and step up to feather? Why wait 5 years to challenge The Man? Of course, revisionist history will tell you its the other way round, the featherweight champ 'ducked' a jr feather for 5 years...
Interesting post...

The reason people talk about Hamed 'stepping up' is that Barrera is undoubtedly the best fighter he ever faced. At the time, that wasn't so clear, although of course Barrera's performance against Morales showed he was far from washed up, nobody could have foretold that he was going to go on to have to have the career has has had.

why was Barrera obliged to leave Super Bantamweight and fight Hamed? What for?

Have to agree with Phoenix, Barrera stepped up versus Hamed rather than vice versa. Hamed had unified all of 126 - Barrera was a WBO belt holder whos only unification was with Morales which was a toss up. And previously he lost to Junior Jones TWICE

Hadn't Bungu acheived as much at 122 as Barrera anyway? He beat MkKinney years before Barrera and thats Barreras biggest win prior to Hamed. And Bungu was put to sleep in 4rounds. Hamed must have thought Barrera would be just as easy.

Losing to Barrera was probably worse from an ego vantage point than losing to someone like Mayweather as Barrera had 3losses and came up a division - Hamed probably didn't rate Barrera which probably hurt the ego the most. Because I still think he could have won a rematch if he really wanted too.

IMO Hamed is greater than Barrera just as Ali is greater than Norton. Barrera had Nazs number to some extent but you'd never see Hamed lose to Junior Jones or Paquiao.

J · Post by J » 13 Oct 2005, 09:45

nor would you see him beat morales.

Naz is NOT greater than MAB.

and you got he comparison the wrong way round.

not in million years bro, sorry.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 13 Oct 2005, 09:52

J wrote:nor would you see him beat morales.

Naz is NOT greater than MAB.

not in million years bro, sorry.

Morales wouldn't give Naz the same problems as Barrera. Barrera is the superior counter puncher and far faster than Morales. Morales would probably get into a brawl with Hamed which wouldn't fare well for him. Its silly saying just because Barrera beat Hamed Morales could too, Morales didn't have the same quality of defense as Barrera.

Morales and Hamed actually both suffered from Barreras speed and timing of countering alongside his superior defense. Hamed was down more than Morales but not that much more - it looked worse than it was.

Morales outweighed Barrera by 10+lbs last fight and still got beat - Barrera just provides a very difficult style to soem fighters. Speedy fighters seems to have a much easier time with him - JJ and Pac - its the old Frazier beat Ali, Foreman destroyed Frazier but Ali beats Foreman thing. Barrera isn't looking for a rematch with Pac!!!

J · Post by J » 13 Oct 2005, 09:53

so you think that Naz would beat Morlaes, sorry again I dont get your logic at all for obvious reasons really.

but cheers for trying nice to chat sensibly to ya mate

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Oct 2005, 10:03

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Phoenix wrote:Hamed wins. I'd take the 95/96 version of Hamed over pretty much any feather from Mcguigans time onwards. Maybe not a prime Erik Morales (not sure thats a good matchup for Hamed). Would take that Naz over Barrera and Pacman though in a heartbeat.

IMO the Kelley fight was the start of the decline, he was terrrible in that fight until the last part of the third round when he finally found some rhythm. Kinda blew hot and cold from there onwards, looked ok against Vasquez, crap against Soto, ok against Mcullough, great against Bungu, crap against Sanchez, etc...

As I recall Hamed/Barrera was first being put together back in 1996, now that would have been a much better fight than the 2001 version.

The opinion that Hamed finally 'stepped up' against Barrera is totally incorrect. ONE THING that nobody seems to mention is from say 96/97 onwards Hamed was considered 'The Man' @ 126. Why did it take until 2001 for Barrera to leave 122 and step up to feather? Why wait 5 years to challenge The Man? Of course, revisionist history will tell you its the other way round, the featherweight champ 'ducked' a jr feather for 5 years...
Interesting post...

The reason people talk about Hamed 'stepping up' is that Barrera is undoubtedly the best fighter he ever faced. At the time, that wasn't so clear, although of course Barrera's performance against Morales showed he was far from washed up, nobody could have foretold that he was going to go on to have to have the career has has had.

why was Barrera obliged to leave Super Bantamweight and fight Hamed? What for?
Have to agree with Phoenix, Barrera stepped up versus Hamed rather than vice versa. Hamed had unified all of 126 - Barrera was a WBO belt holder whos only unification was with Morales which was a toss up. And previously he lost to Junior Jones TWICE

Hadn't Bungu acheived as much at 122 as Barrera anyway? He beat MkKinney years before Barrera and thats Barreras biggest win prior to Hamed. And Bungu was put to sleep in 4rounds. Hamed must have thought Barrera would be just as easy.

Losing to Barrera was probably worse from an ego vantage point than losing to someone like Mayweather as Barrera had 3losses and came up a division - Hamed probably didn't rate Barrera which probably hurt the ego the most. Because I still think he could have won a rematch if he really wanted too.

IMO Hamed is greater than Barrera just as Ali is greater than Norton. Barrera had Nazs number to some extent but you'd never see Hamed lose to Junior Jones or Paquiao.

What!! Based on what? Hamed never fought either man, so how do we know that?

Fact is, whilst Hamed is off getting fat, which is his right, Barrera is still fighting and adding to his legacy, he has wins over Morales, who is better than anyone Hamed ever beat, and also Hamed lets not forget.

Pacquaio would have given Hamed a fight, sure, Hamed hit hard, but so does Pacman, and he is bloody quick. His style might have played into Hamed's hands, but I don't think Hamed would have found the combination of speed and power a lot of fun. Pacman would have had a punchers chance for sure.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 13 Oct 2005, 10:21

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote: Interesting post...

The reason people talk about Hamed 'stepping up' is that Barrera is undoubtedly the best fighter he ever faced. At the time, that wasn't so clear, although of course Barrera's performance against Morales showed he was far from washed up, nobody could have foretold that he was going to go on to have to have the career has has had.

why was Barrera obliged to leave Super Bantamweight and fight Hamed? What for?
Have to agree with Phoenix, Barrera stepped up versus Hamed rather than vice versa. Hamed had unified all of 126 - Barrera was a WBO belt holder whos only unification was with Morales which was a toss up. And previously he lost to Junior Jones TWICE

Hadn't Bungu acheived as much at 122 as Barrera anyway? He beat MkKinney years before Barrera and thats Barreras biggest win prior to Hamed. And Bungu was put to sleep in 4rounds. Hamed must have thought Barrera would be just as easy.

Losing to Barrera was probably worse from an ego vantage point than losing to someone like Mayweather as Barrera had 3losses and came up a division - Hamed probably didn't rate Barrera which probably hurt the ego the most. Because I still think he could have won a rematch if he really wanted too.

IMO Hamed is greater than Barrera just as Ali is greater than Norton. Barrera had Nazs number to some extent but you'd never see Hamed lose to Junior Jones or Paquiao.
What!! Based on what? Hamed never fought either man, so how do we know that?

Fact is, whilst Hamed is off getting fat, which is his right, Barrera is still fighting and adding to his legacy, he has wins over Morales, who is better than anyone Hamed ever beat, and also Hamed lets not forget.

Pacquaio would have given Hamed a fight, sure, Hamed hit hard, but so does Pacman, and he is bloody quick. His style might have played into Hamed's hands, but I don't think Hamed would have found the combination of speed and power a lot of fun. Pacman would have had a punchers chance for sure.

Yea I wish Hamed would have comeback. He had all the talent in the world but money and fame destroys the hunger of great fighters it takes the hunger away - look at Tyson for instance.

Barrera didn't fight all the champs Hamed did either. Hamed fought about 10-13 world champs (current/future/past) in a short space of time many top top fighters and he completely destroyed them - now the uneducated boxing fan calls his opponents bums - they were probably P4P better than Hopkins and Zoos comp imo.

Do we rate Tunney over Dempsey? Barrera caught Hamed at the right time with the right style. I stand by what I said though even a 2001 Hamed KOs prime JJ and Pacman

J · Post by J » 13 Oct 2005, 10:27

what do you meran MAB didnt fight the champs Hamed did?
od do you mean Mab has fought 3 times as many ?

cos thats closer to the truth.

as for these comparisons you keep bringin up they arent relevant, Tunney retired post Demspey but won, MAB won and carried on, its not a viable analogy no matter how you look at it.

If you are saying that Hamed will be rated as better than Barerra then Im sorry you dont have a clue what you are on about.

johnswan1 · Post by **johnswan1** » 13 Oct 2005, 11:01

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote: Have to agree with Phoenix, Barrera stepped up versus Hamed rather than vice versa. Hamed had unified all of 126 - Barrera was a WBO belt holder whos only unification was with Morales which was a toss up. And previously he lost to Junior Jones TWICE

Hadn't Bungu acheived as much at 122 as Barrera anyway? He beat MkKinney years before Barrera and thats Barreras biggest win prior to Hamed. And Bungu was put to sleep in 4rounds. Hamed must have thought Barrera would be just as easy.

Losing to Barrera was probably worse from an ego vantage point than losing to someone like Mayweather as Barrera had 3losses and came up a division - Hamed probably didn't rate Barrera which probably hurt the ego the most. Because I still think he could have won a rematch if he really wanted too.

IMO Hamed is greater than Barrera just as Ali is greater than Norton. Barrera had Nazs number to some extent but you'd never see Hamed lose to Junior Jones or Paquiao.
What!! Based on what? Hamed never fought either man, so how do we know that?

Fact is, whilst Hamed is off getting fat, which is his right, Barrera is still fighting and adding to his legacy, he has wins over Morales, who is better than anyone Hamed ever beat, and also Hamed lets not forget.

Pacquaio would have given Hamed a fight, sure, Hamed hit hard, but so does Pacman, and he is bloody quick. His style might have played into Hamed's hands, but I don't think Hamed would have found the combination of speed and power a lot of fun. Pacman would have had a punchers chance for sure.
Yea I wish Hamed would have comeback. He had all the talent in the world but money and fame destroys the hunger of great fighters it takes the hunger away - look at Tyson for instance.

Barrera didn't fight all the champs Hamed did either. Hamed fought about 10-13 world champs (current/future/past) in a short space of time many top top fighters and he completely destroyed them - now the uneducated boxing fan calls his opponents bums - they were probably P4P better than Hopkins and Zoos comp imo.

Do we rate Tunney over Dempsey? Barrera caught Hamed at the right time with the right style. I stand by what I said though even a 2001 Hamed KOs prime JJ and Pacman

Shut up. Shut up talking shit.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 13 Oct 2005, 11:04

why was Barrera obliged to leave Super Bantamweight and fight Hamed? What for?

sure he wasn't obliged to step up, but feather is a natural jump up anyway and Hamed had a lot of gravity around that time (all kinds of names being mentioned from 122-130). Kind of like how Hopkins can attract jr middles to step up like Tito and DLH, they weren't 'obliged' to do it but they still did.

Anyway best believe if it had been the other way round, Barrera the champ at feather and Hamed refusing to leave 122, he'd have copped a LOT of shit for that.

If you are saying that Hamed will be rated as better than Barerra then Im sorry you dont have a clue what you are on about.

better featherweight (achievements, length of reign etc), but not the better fighter (p4p if you like).

bugs · Post by **bugs** » 13 Oct 2005, 11:15

When Hamed was in his prime, and still with Ingle, I really felt that he was unbeatable, he did not just beat former champs he made them look clumsy and I dont care how hard Pac hits, nobody banged as hard as Hamed, his whole body was in the punch not just shoulders and hips.

It would have been interesting seeing a prime Hamed fight the cream of today's crop, but it is not going to happen, IMO (and a lot of it is gut feel and sheer wonder at watching the guy fight) Hamed would beat the lot.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 13 Oct 2005, 11:17

J wrote:what do you meran MAB didnt fight the champs Hamed did?
od do you mean Mab has fought 3 times as many ?

cos thats closer to the truth.

as for these comparisons you keep bringin up they arent relevant, Tunney retired post Demspey but won, MAB won and carried on, its not a viable analogy no matter how you look at it.

If you are saying that Hamed will be rated as better than Barerra then Im sorry you dont have a clue what you are on about.

No I meant they fought DIFFERENT champs. I didn't say Hamed fought more champs (Barreras fought 20 something now).

I know most people will rate Barrera above Hamed but I don't and I'm prepared to get shot down for it. The fact is Barrera couldn't go undefeated for as long as Hamed did on similar comps. What divisions has Barrera cleaned out? Yes hes got good wins before hes lost in each 1 and brutally KO'd twice (well with towells).

The Hamed-Barrera story is like that of Leonard-Hagler. Hamed/Hagler dominates a division for years beating all belt holders and all up and comers from 147/122. Hamed/Hagler gets past their best and the up and the smaller slicker lower weight champ outboxes him while never really engaging a fight.

J · Post by J » 13 Oct 2005, 11:42

fiar enough i think we both can be man enough to agree to disagree!
Its obvious that Naz is a fave of yours, and ill let you into a secret MAB is one of my faces so, no chance of us agreeing on this

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 13 Oct 2005, 11:47

let you into a secret MAB is one of my faces

lol what was that character in he-man who had 3 faces and you spun his head round to show a new one??

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 13 Oct 2005, 11:48

J wrote:fiar enough i think we both can be man enough to agree to disagree!
Its obvious that Naz is a fave of yours, and ill let you into a secret MAB is one of my faces so, no chance of us agreeing on this

Naz is certainly a fave of mine, MAB has become a fave over years of appreciation of the more suttle art too, I'm a MAB fan too and was gunning for him in MAB-Morales 3 which I picked him to win.

I think MAB has a shot in a Pacman rematch - early in the first fight MAB was outboxing Pac - he just needs to stay away from that fast southpaw 1-2 - easier said than done maybe. Not sure why he hasn't gone for it yet.

Naz is criminally underated by boxing fans though (mainly the Yanks)probably because many of them were always waiting for him to lose so they could say he was never any good.

johnswan1 · Post by **johnswan1** » 13 Oct 2005, 11:55

Phoenix wrote:
let you into a secret MAB is one of my faces
lol what was that character in he-man who had 3 faces and you spun his head round to show a new one??

His name was simply "Three Faces". One was a man, one was a robot and one was a lizard.

Wrists · Post by **Wrists** » 13 Oct 2005, 12:04

Whose better p4p??

Robert Allen v Wilfredo Vasquez
Morrade Hakkar v Kevin Kelley
Howard Eastman v Paul Ingle
Robert Allen (again ) v Cesar Soto
Ooh!! Allen once more v Jose Badillo
2 welterweights jumping up 2 weight divisions v genuine fighters at the same weight

I hope you can see where I am going with this - ok I am using extremes but lets make this point again!!

Naz was a great fighter he virtually cleaned up a division in 5 years and was unbeaten for a long time he fought very good fighters certainly comparable to others but gets a slating for two reasons:

1. he retired too early - I can go with that
2. he was arrogant and perhaps the biggest crime not american

Listen, the guy was a great fighter he won 3 world titles provided entertainiment and was beaten of a hall of famer and all time great, its not a crime, its time this was put to bed Naz was great to underplay what he did because of a dislike for the man rather than the fighter is wrong period

regards

kev aka wrists

J · Post by J » 13 Oct 2005, 12:07

johnswan1 wrote:
Phoenix wrote:
let you into a secret MAB is one of my faces
lol what was that character in he-man who had 3 faces and you spun his head round to show a new one??
His name was simply "Three Faces". One was a man, one was a robot and one was a lizard.

hahaa sorry meant faves. the c is next to the v you see.....

thanks to phenom for letitng me off with that one, the rest of you boosucks to ya hahaha

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 13 Oct 2005, 16:13

johnswan1 wrote:
Phoenix wrote:
let you into a secret MAB is one of my faces
lol what was that character in he-man who had 3 faces and you spun his head round to show a new one??
His name was simply "Three Faces". One was a man, one was a robot and one was a lizard.

Three Faces? I always called him Man-E-Faces for some reason, he was cool. Made a terrific central midfield in my he-man good guys football team.

Anyway, on the debate. Have to agree with J, though.

Hamed never faced an opponent as good as a prime Junior Jones, just his prime didn't last long. I see (and I might be harsh) the many of Hamed's opponents is comparible to the Johnny Tapia that Barrera faced - a belt holder but past his prime.

BAM BAM TUA · Post by **BAM BAM TUA** » 13 Oct 2005, 16:43

the naz in the steward camp was TRASH, he lost alot of momentum...if he was in the same train-of-thought when he was with ingle, he wouldve foughta differnt fighta ginst barera!!!

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 13 Oct 2005, 17:47

Man-E-Faces it is !

http://minnch.free.fr/image/mdlu/new_ed ... _recto.jpg

DIRT SUGAR · Post by **DIRT SUGAR** » 14 Oct 2005, 12:43

MightyWarrior wrote:
Gordon wrote:i am not so sure.

I think this would have been similar to Barry's fight with Bernard Taylor.

A slick fast boxer who outboxed Barry, but couldn't keep him completeley away.

Barry cut down the ring and ate away at Taylor with bodypunches until an exhausted Taylor succumbed to a 9th round stoppage.
Barry could hardly touch Taylor for the first 6 or so rounds, then Taylor suddenly quit which took most people by surprise. The American had little heart for a fight, so not a good comparison.

Err, I think McGuigan did manage to break Taylor's rib(or ribs) and while Taylor boxed well, McGuigan was getting on top when the fight was stopped.

If Paul Ingle, who was no serious puncher, and an ageing Kevin Kelly could have Hamed in trouble, a peak McGuigan, who was a very hurtful puncher, would have done some serious damage.

I interviewed McGuigan once about this fight and he said he'd have loved to fight Naz and felt his style suited him down to the ground.

McGuigan late KO