Prince Naseem Hameds peak performance.....................

[NazNaci1]

Hopkins is a whole level above anyone Naz ever beat though and most people though Calzaghe won that fight. Naz didn't beat Kevin Kelly convincingly and Tom Johnson, Vuyani Bungu, etc, are hardly great opposition. Naz fought one great fighter in his career and he was beaten thoroughly, the rest of his resume has very average opposition for a fighter who is considered a legend by some.

Getting dropped and ekeing out a (dubious) decison is more convincing than getting dropped, dropping the other guy and then winning by KO, in your book?

[crusader]

Hopkins is a whole level above anyone Naz ever beat though and most people though Calzaghe won that fight. Naz didn't beat Kevin Kelly convincingly and Tom Johnson, Vuyani Bungu, etc, are hardly great opposition. Naz fought one great fighter in his career and he was beaten thoroughly, the rest of his resume has very average opposition for a fighter who is considered a legend by some.

Getting dropped and ekeing out a (dubious) decison is more convincing than getting dropped, dropping the other guy and then winning by KO, in your book?

It was not a dubious decision by any means. The majority of people who saw the fight thought Calzaghe won. Scoring any type of win over Hopkins > Beating Kevin Kelly, no matter how impressive it was (and getting dropped three times by Kelly is not impressive)

And besides when did I say Calzaghes win was convincing? He simply beat a much better opponent than anyone Naz ever did.

[observer1]

The fighters during Naz's time were terrible, really, really awful. Not one of these guys will go into, or anywhere near the hall of fame. This is supposedly one of the greatest British boxers of all time, yet the only hall of famer he came up against made him retire.

Kevin Kelley was even past his best when Naz fought him. His record may have looked decent on paper with only one defeat. He never once beat a genuine world class opponent.

Naz beat no elite fighters during his career - not one. Yet he was considered by many to be at the top of the pound for pound list.

Overall, Naz was a great fighter, but people will look at the record books and although they'll see an impressive KO record, they'll also notice that the only name opponent he came up against he got beaten by.

Many had Calzaghe #2 in their p4p list.

Who did he beat?
Lacy? Kessler?

Calzaghe also beat Hopkins, who is better than anyone Naz ever beat. Funny you left him out

Ok

So Calzaghe's best wins are Lacy, Kessler and a dodgy SD against a 43 year old.

Calzaghe had the chance to face Prime Hopkins, RJJ, Tarver, Johnson dang even Toney if he wanted to, but settled on mediocre/sub-par opposition.

Up until Hopkins and RJJ were shadows of themselves and couldn't draw a big bout if they wanted to. The RJJ-Calzaghe PPV Flop will prove my point there.

Sorry, But it took Joe's entire career to unify the SMW division against Sub-Par opposition.

Naz became undisputed FW champ and faced much more stronger opposition.

As for the record. Kelly was a KO Artist. Naz was at the point in his career after sacking Ingle, he seemed to have forgot what a Jab and defence was.

And yeah, i do think his KO over Kelley was alot more convincing than Joe's dodgy SD against 43 year old Hopkins.

[crusader]

Kevin Kelly a KO artist? LOL. He really has a staggering KO percentage for a knockout artist Who are some of the top fighters he stopped? Derrick Gainer? Seems to me like alot of nondescript opponents went rounds with him.

Hopkins may have been 43 but he was fighting as well as he ever has and went on to outclass a p4p rated fighter in his next bout and is currently #3 on most peoples p4p lists. Pretty good for a 43 year old. Its laughable that you are on about what was a more convincing win. The fact is that Kelly was never anywhere near Hopkins leauge, even as a 43 year old. Who cares if it was more convincing, Hamed would have never been able to score a win like that over an elite fighter like Hopkins. He faced one elite fighter in his entire career and was humiliated.

[crusader]

too be fair to calzaghe, it was never going to look good against the tactics.

It is also a lot harder to look good against a guaranteed Hall of Famer and p4p elite fighter than Kevin Kelly

[observer1]

it was more convincing but kevin kelley isn't in hopkins league. Im bored of this he could have faced a prime hopkins, hopkins turned joe down, he was offered 3 million, agreed then rang back and demanded 6 and priced himself out. this was in 2003.

Oh shut it son, just shut it.

Boxers and their negotiations break down 1000' times over. If you dont understand that, you're either very new to Boxing, or just lack common sense.

You only need to look at Pac/Mayweather/Cotto/Mosley/Williams/Marquez etc. They were all meant to face each other at some point or another but negotiations broke down for whatever reason.

Hopkins was p4p #1 back in 2003.

Along with RJJ, De La Hoya etc. They were looking for the own paydays. Eventually Hopkins got his against DLH about a year later.

Don't mistake Hopkins' abandoning Calzaghe as "Runnin'". I'm pretty sure it's more to do with the fact that Hopkins had bigger aims than going to Wales to get the "prestigious WBO Belt"

If Joe made half the effort to face Hopkins, RJJ, Johnson and Tarver and co. back in those days like he did in 2008. He would have eventually faced one of them.

Instead he chose to face the calibre of Pudwill, Veit and Mitchell (LMFAO)

[NazNaci1]

too be fair to calzaghe, it was never going to look good against the tactics.

It is also a lot harder to look good against a guaranteed Hall of Famer and p4p elite fighter than Kevin Kelly

calzaghe would have looked fantastic against kelley D

Naz would have looked better against Hopkins, tbqh 8)

[observer1]

Kevin Kelly a KO artist? LOL. He really has a staggering KO percentage for a knockout artist Who are some of the top fighters he stopped? Derrick Gainer? Seems to me like alot of nondescript opponents went rounds with him.

Hopkins may have been 43 but he was fighting as well as he ever has and went on to outclass a p4p rated fighter in his next bout and is currently #3 on most peoples p4p lists. Pretty good for a 43 year old. Its laughable that you are on about what was a more convincing win. The fact is that Kelly was never anywhere near Hopkins leauge, even as a 43 year old. Who cares if it was more convincing, Hamed would have never been able to score a win like that over an elite fighter like Hopkins. He faced one elite fighter in his entire career and was humiliated.

Humiliated? Right right.

I take it you're another Chav that just recently started watching Boxing.

Try watching the bout.

A Passed it Naz lost by 3/4 Rounds. It was a loss waiting to happen.

You're right, Hopkins is leagues better than Kelley.

But if you understand basic English, You'd be able to understand that i never compared the two.

I just compared to the Naz's win over Kelley to be far more convincing than a Dodgy SD against a 43 year old Hopkins,.

[crusader]

Humiliated? Right right.

I take it you're another Chav that just recently started watching Boxing.

Try watching the bout.

A Passed it Naz lost by 3/4 Rounds. It was a loss waiting to happen.

I would say he was humiliated when his head was slammed into the ring post after he had been clearly beaten. The fight wasn't close, Naz won 4 rounds on the closet card.

But if you understand basic English, You'd be able to understand that i never compared the two.

I just compared to the Naz's win over Kelley to be far more convincing than a Dodgy SD against a 43 year old Hopkins,

I understand English, but I don't understand what point someone is trying to get across by arguing about which win was more convincing. They were fighting two much different opponents skill wise and no one has ever looked good against Hopkins. And when did I ever say Joe's win was more convincing? I don't see why your trying to make the point in the first place.

[observer1]

Do you think slamming an opponents head into a turnbuckle is "Humiliating"?

I call it cheap.

What i call humiliatig is being Knocked down in the 1st round by a 43 year old Boxer.

[crusader]

Do you think slamming an opponents head into a turnbuckle is "Humiliating"?

I call it cheap.

What i call humiliatig is being Knocked down in the 1st round by a 43 year old Boxer.

Being knocked down by a legend who is still one of the premiere fighters in the game is not humiliating. Being dropped three times in four rounds by a guy like Kevin Kelly is more humiliating than that. Having your head guided square into a turnbuckle while the whole arena cheers in delight is also pretty humiliating.

[NazNaci1]

It's perspective mate - Does this have to turn into another Joe Calzaghe thread, halfways there anyways, i guess ?

[crusader]

Badillo was probably the most impressive and that has to be the best I've ever seen Hamed, so I voted for that as his peak performance. He has alot of knockouts that have stayed in my head though. His KO of Ingle was one of my favorites, they way Ingle went stumbling backwards across the ring in the 11th as Naz watched him fall. For all the faults I can find with Hamed at least he was exciting and offered some type of drama, and usually a great KO. I suppose if he hadn't been such an arrogant asshole he would have been one of my favorite fighters.

[NazNaci1]

For all the faults I can find with Hamed at least he was exciting and offered some type of drama, and usually a great KO. I suppose if he hadn't been such an arrogant asshole he would have been one of my favorite fighters.

hehehe, fair comment

[cookjason3]

Bungu ! Punch perfect performance !

[Kilburn]

I've always felt the Badillo fight was Naz at his fittest and most impressive.

Had he been in that kind of condition against Barrera we'd have seen a real fight.