BoxRec

Decagon wrote:

Eric the Viking wrote:Like 'Bama-man said, the Little Prince never beat an elite featherweight in his prime *ever*

Same with Pacquiao.

Sasakul #2 in the weight class at the time (behind Johnson, but ahead of Yuri), Barrera P4P #3 Ring Mag when Pacquiao beat him, Ledwaba #3-#2 in the weight class at the time, and wins against Morales, Larios. Pacquiao's resume shines in comparison to the flying Princess.

You simply don't know very much about boxing.

I think on this topic Hamed is being overrated and underrated I mean he was a really good fighter maybe not a legend or anything but the guy could fight.

Fighting Pacquiao it would depend on how well Pacquiao's chin held up and how well his own chin held up I think Hamed doing his goofy ass moves gets dropped a few times, not hurt just dropped and then eventually loses on points.

Pac has beaten better competition.. the only one of them that I can see beating a prime Hamed when pac fought them is Barrera....

Decagon wrote:Barrera only beat the past-his-prime and unmotivated Hamed by two or three points. I doubt he could do as well against a prime Hamed.

Barerra was also past his prime... against Pac..

For the Pacaholics here I'd say your drunk on your man about the same way the Prince fans used to get drunk to his tune. You can make the argument that Manny has beaten better opposition but matched against Naseem, Naseems power would be a loose cannon.

Barrera was slick enough to avoid his power. Manny would fight a more open fight and probably take some chances that Antonio would never take. It's no slam dunk for Manny and anyone could be victim to Naz.

I said I would favor Naz because of the psyche aspect. I think Manny would be willing to trade with him and in a one shot fight event he could become a victim. Based on styles and personalities. If it were all about skills (like so many mistakenly think are the only factors) then yes you'd bet on Manny. But I think Manny could beat himself in this fight just trying to make a point.

Boxing purists are often wrong with their betting because they focus too often on pure skills and reputation and not enough on the human factors of the various fighters.

BoxBuzz wrote:I said I would favor Naz because of the psyche aspect. I think Manny would be willing to trade with him and in a one shot fight event he could become a victim. Based on styles and personalities. If it were all about skills (like so many mistakenly think are the only factors) then yes you'd bet on Manny. But I think Manny could beat himself in this fight just trying to make a point.

Possibly, but's it's precisely the psychological aspect which is the reason for the widespread disdain for Hamed. Here you have quite possibly the most arrogant loudmouthed braggart of recent memory in the aport, who finally gets sparked by a top-flight boxer who refuses to be impressed by the Naz-hype, and what does his Prince-ness do? Does he tone down the mouth, get his butt in the gym and train like hell for a rematch? No, he folds like a house of cards.

True, as with Naz, Pac's opposition may not be as great as some make it out to be, but you can't *ever* accuse Pac of being just a paper tiger like Hamed proved himself to be.

BoxBuzz wrote:For the Pacaholics here I'd say your drunk on your man about the same way the Prince fans used to get drunk to his tune. You can make the argument that Manny has beaten better opposition but matched against Naseem, Naseems power would be a loose cannon.

Barrera was slick enough to avoid his power. Manny would fight a more open fight and probably take some chances that Antonio would never take. It's no slam dunk for Manny and anyone could be victim to Naz.

I said I would favor Naz because of the psyche aspect. I think Manny would be willing to trade with him and in a one shot fight event he could become a victim. Based on styles and personalities. If it were all about skills (like so many mistakenly think are the only factors) then yes you'd bet on Manny. But I think Manny could beat himself in this fight just trying to make a point.

Boxing purists are often wrong with their betting because they focus too often on pure skills and reputation and not enough on the human factors of the various fighters.

Very nice post..

Eric the Viking wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:I said I would favor Naz because of the psyche aspect. I think Manny would be willing to trade with him and in a one shot fight event he could become a victim. Based on styles and personalities. If it were all about skills (like so many mistakenly think are the only factors) then yes you'd bet on Manny. But I think Manny could beat himself in this fight just trying to make a point.

Possibly, but's it's precisely the psychological aspect which is the reason for the widespread disdain for Hamed. Here you have quite possibly the most arrogant loudmouthed braggart of recent memory in the aport, who finally gets sparked by a top-flight boxer who refuses to be impressed by the Naz-hype, and what does his Prince-ness do? Does he tone down the mouth, get his butt in the gym and train like hell for a rematch? No, he folds like a house of cards.

True, as with Naz, Pac's opposition may not be as great as some make it out to be, but you can't *ever* accuse Pac of being just a paper tiger like Hamed proved himself to be.

There is a degree of wild card in either direction.
And if Manny went in with "Barrera intelligence" he would probably fare well. But Pac is still often a gunslinger and if he goes in with gunlslinger mentality his odds go down. I think Naz's brashness would irritate Manny more than a cold stoic Antonio......and so the odds tip a bit to Naz for me.

Hi gents,

the Hamed of 96/97 would beat Pacquaio in a terrific fight, with it probably going to the scorecards for a win by 6-odd rounds. The Haemd of 1999-onwards would have been pummeled around the ring and lost on points.

Prime vs Prime and overall as fighters at 126lbs....?

Hamed

best wishes

"T.M.K"

I'm sure Naz would have pulled out some of his best show boating and posing for this one. Besides that, with Naz poking out his chin and flopping his arms about at his side, Pacquiao would smash him to pieces.

Who cares? Two southpaws fighting each other is the worst. They don't know what to do with each other. And those two are both over rated.........Boring fight....

Hamed easy decision victory. Paquiao never gets close to the clown.

This topic is plain stupid.

If Kevin Kelley was on the brink of beating Hamed... Pacquiao would have done a number on him.

Kelley and Pacquiao, both fast, powerful, come foward lefties... Pacquiao obviously the better of the two.

Alabama_Man wrote:
You simply don't know very much about boxing.

To save you time, why dont you put that as your location instead? That or 'This is the shittiest Thread...'?

You simply don't have very good people skills.

IMO, Pacman takes out Hamed, but I wouldn't undersell Hamed either....

Alabama seems to be one of those people who either regard a fighter as ATG or nobody.... there is a middle ground mate..... shades of variation, like your tan.

Pac will no doubt have a better resume when he retires but i think Hamed would have KOd him in the middle rounds. Barrera beat Hamed by being cautious and counterpunching. Pac would be all out aggression as always and would walk into a right hand. I think Pac would be KOd with 1 punch.