Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Vladimir5555
Super Middleweight
Posts: 1221
Joined: 12 Apr 2013, 11:38

Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Vladimir5555 »

I think Professor win by decision 116-112
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Rover »

Nelson on points.
dr_devious
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5349
Joined: 29 Dec 2005, 09:19

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by dr_devious »

Nelson by KO, a clear level above Hamed
gilgamesh
Cruiserweight
Posts: 46518
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 16:21

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by gilgamesh »

Azumah Nelson W12
Datsue
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Datsue »

Nelson.
Ketchel
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 866
Joined: 17 Nov 2008, 14:18

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Ketchel »

Nelson
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by polecateddy »

I think it's impossible to really say how Nelson would have coped with a peak Naz. His Pat Cowdell win was quite reminiscent of say Naz's win over Billy Hardy. However Nelson was rarely as totally dominant and spectacular as Naz in his wins. And when he met Pernell Whittaker he was completely outboxed. I will go against the grain of this thread and say Naz on PTS.
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Rover »

The Whitaker fight was at lightweight, and Whitaker>>>Hamed.
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by polecateddy »

Rover wrote:The Whitaker fight was at lightweight, and Whitaker>>>Hamed.
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
RadioElRadar
Super Middleweight
Posts: 292
Joined: 04 Dec 2012, 04:35

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by RadioElRadar »

I've always been a big fan of Naz and agree that he gets undersold a lot of the time but Nelson is just too good imo and would have him all figured out by the mid rounds.

The Professor by comprehensive decision.
Bobbyptsd
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1858
Joined: 24 Apr 2011, 00:58

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Bobbyptsd »

polecateddy wrote:
Rover wrote:The Whitaker fight was at lightweight, and Whitaker>>>Hamed.
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
I agree Nelson could be outboxed, but I'm frankly a little amazed you think Naz would be the one to do it. I would think if he had a chance, it would be to catch Nelson with something big. I don't think that's as likely as Nelson just outboxing hm, even though I am a big fan of his(Naz).
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by polecateddy »

Bobbyptsd wrote:
polecateddy wrote:
Rover wrote:The Whitaker fight was at lightweight, and Whitaker>>>Hamed.
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
I agree Nelson could be outboxed, but I'm frankly a little amazed you think Naz would be the one to do it. I would think if he had a chance, it would be to catch Nelson with something big. I don't think that's as likely as Nelson just outboxing hm, even though I am a big fan of his(Naz).
Naz gets marked down a lot because he was outpointed by Barrera. But people do tend to forget that the Naz who lived and breathed boxing at the start of his career. I think the version who say beat Steve Robinson could potentially stand Nelson on his head!
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Rover »

polecateddy wrote:
Rover wrote:The Whitaker fight was at lightweight, and Whitaker>>>Hamed.
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
I'm a Naz fan. Saying Whitaker outboxed Nelson really doesn't tell us much about this match-up. That's kind of like saying that X would KO Y because Hearns did--two divisions north.
Giancarlo
Cruiserweight
Posts: 2316
Joined: 23 Feb 2011, 15:32

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Giancarlo »

The Professor.
giacomino
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15550
Joined: 14 Dec 2007, 19:33

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by giacomino »

Professor UD
gilgamesh
Cruiserweight
Posts: 46518
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 16:21

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by gilgamesh »

polecateddy wrote:
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
I don't think he has a Hall of Fame resume.
polecateddy
Heavyweight
Heavyweight

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by polecateddy »

gilgamesh wrote:
polecateddy wrote:
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
I don't think he has a Hall of Fame resume.
Yet they put Gatti in.
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Rover »

polecateddy wrote:
gilgamesh wrote:
polecateddy wrote:
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
I don't think he has a Hall of Fame resume.
Yet they put Gatti in.
Which is a joke.
I'd vote no on Hamed. But he'll likely get in eventually.
gilgamesh
Cruiserweight
Posts: 46518
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 16:21

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by gilgamesh »

polecateddy wrote:
gilgamesh wrote:
polecateddy wrote:
I'm not trying to put Naz above Whittaker. But there's no denying there is nearly always an anti-Naz bias because people just don't like him. He should be in the boxing hall of fame, but again there's this bias. I was simply pointing out that Nelson could be outboxed. And the younger version of Naz was pretty amazing.
I don't think he has a Hall of Fame resume.
Yet they put Gatti in.
He didn't belong either. It is the Hall of FAME though, and he was more famous than most other active fighters of his era even though several of them were more accomplished. I'm sure his untimely death played into his being inducted as well.
Bobbyptsd
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1858
Joined: 24 Apr 2011, 00:58

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Bobbyptsd »

^That's a good point that's often overlooked. It's the hall of fame, not the hall of accomplishment.
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15173
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Ambling Alp II »

"Hall of Accomplishment" doesn't have a great ring to it, does it? :D
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Rover »

Ambling Alp II wrote:"Hall of Accomplishment" doesn't have a great ring to it, does it? :D
Exactly. Luis Resto's a famous boxer. HBO even did a documentary about one of his fights. He doesn't belong in the HOF.
gilgamesh
Cruiserweight
Posts: 46518
Joined: 02 Sep 2010, 16:21

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by gilgamesh »

Rover wrote:
Ambling Alp II wrote:"Hall of Accomplishment" doesn't have a great ring to it, does it? :D
Exactly. Luis Resto's a famous boxer. HBO even did a documentary about one of his fights. He doesn't belong in the HOF.
I would say Luis Resto is an infamous boxer. In the same vein of Antonio Margarito.
Giancarlo
Cruiserweight
Posts: 2316
Joined: 23 Feb 2011, 15:32

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Giancarlo »

polecateddy wrote: Naz gets marked down a lot because he was outpointed by Barrera. But people do tend to forget that the Naz who lived and breathed boxing at the start of his career. I think the version who say beat Steve Robinson could potentially stand Nelson on his head!
Highly unlikely in my opinion.
Rover
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 7323
Joined: 20 Aug 2011, 00:28

Re: Azumah Nelson . vs Naseem Hamed

Post by Rover »

gilgamesh wrote:
Rover wrote:
Ambling Alp II wrote:"Hall of Accomplishment" doesn't have a great ring to it, does it? :D
Exactly. Luis Resto's a famous boxer. HBO even did a documentary about one of his fights. He doesn't belong in the HOF.
I would say Luis Resto is an infamous boxer. In the same vein of Antonio Margarito.
Margarito had achieved fame before the Mosley scandal--at least in Mexico.
But fair enough, back to my Butterbean example.
Post Reply