BoxRec

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Coco wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

When did Hamed go over the hill? When Barrera started punching his face?

I picked Barrera going in, and it wasn't because there was any evidence of the 27 year old Hamed being "over the hill". Your logic seems to be when he was a WBO champ boxing handpicked WBO opponents at home he looked fantastic therefore was in his prime, when he was in Vegas in a big fight vs an all-round beast and found himself outgunned he was suddenly over the hill.

Perhaps Barrera was just much better than everybody Hamed had ever faced - that two-fisted reality check he gave the Prince ran him right out of boxing.

You never noticed any decline in Hamed?
He was only ever WBO champ?
He only ever fought WBO handpicked opponents?

I noticed a pompous buffoon fall in love with his power. I noticed a deluded fool let his ego grow to the size of a. . . . 2016 Naseem Hamed waistline. I saw it so clearly I told everyone I knew who liked boxing (all 3 of them) Barrera would win.

But was Hamed "past his prime"? No. Did he win belts better than the WBO? Of course, whenever the champ looked ready for the taking. And then vacate them so that he could continue to pick & choose WBO challengers. Hence my post. The meaning behind what I wrote was clear and I excised the alphabet juggling to keep it punchy.

Naz beat all the other champions. The closest Finbar got to Azumah Nelson was losing to Jim McDonnell.

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Pugilist-specialist wrote:
That's your opinion. It is factual.

And yet meaningless without context. It is factual that Danny Williams beat Mike Tyson.

Tyson hadn't been world champ for 8 years when he fought Williams - it's hardly comparable to McGuigan losing to Cruz on his third defence.

And you've proved my point by feeling the need to contextualise the Tyson vs Williams situation rather than accepting it as a stand-alone fact. You've defeated your own previous argument.

Deserter wrote:

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Deserter wrote: And yet meaningless without context. It is factual that Danny Williams beat Mike Tyson.

Tyson hadn't been world champ for 8 years when he fought Williams - it's hardly comparable to McGuigan losing to Cruz on his third defence.

And you've proved my point by feeling the need to contextualise the Tyson vs Williams situation rather than accepting it as a stand-alone fact. You've defeated your own previous argument.

Anyone who has felt the need to use the word "contextualise" on a boxing forum has lost the argument

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Pugilist-specialist wrote: Tyson hadn't been world champ for 8 years when he fought Williams - it's hardly comparable to McGuigan losing to Cruz on his third defence.

And you've proved my point by feeling the need to contextualise the Tyson vs Williams situation rather than accepting it as a stand-alone fact. You've defeated your own previous argument.

Anyone who has felt the need to use the word "contextualise" on a boxing forum has lost the argument

You're resembling the equivalent of a boxer who's just been knocked out cold and is lying on his back still trying to throw punches from muscle memory. Best to accept defeat gracefully before embarrassing yourself any further

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Pugilist-specialist wrote: Tyson hadn't been world champ for 8 years when he fought Williams - it's hardly comparable to McGuigan losing to Cruz on his third defence.

And you've proved my point by feeling the need to contextualise the Tyson vs Williams situation rather than accepting it as a stand-alone fact. You've defeated your own previous argument.

Anyone who has felt the need to use the word "contextualise" on a boxing forum has lost the argument

BM nearly did as much fot boxing in the 80s as naz did in his era. Loved mac s wins over laporte n pedrosa but this is an easy one. A peak naz would torment barry. Barry mac always struggled with etricky guys who could either push him back or be elusive, Iironically his win over pedrza doesnt echo this. Naz was also extremely physically strong as well as been a banger. Naz busts him up in 8.

Pugilist-specialist wrote:Jim McDonnell, Steve Cruz and Peter Eubank all proved too good for Finbar.

I think the Cruz fight he was beaten by barney Eastwood more than anything else. It was madness. Even than he only lost it on the last round.

Cruz gave Esparagozza a hell of a fight.

Mc'donnell really made Barry look bad but at 29 I think Mcguigan turned up and got old in that fight. That kind of pressure fighting style had a limited lifespan like ricky hatton after him.

In his prime v naz's prime its very close but I think naz at his peak bombs him out late

thechump wrote:Iv never seen a mcguigan fight only highlights and he was a vicious body puncher,my old trainer said about ten years ago that barry would of smashed naz prime for prime,ppl forget naz fought over the hill fighters most his career,boom boom,kevin kelly,even fighters we never heard of,manuel madina gave naz nightmares so did ingle in parts of his fight,cesar soto was an average fighter but the best naz could do was body slam him. Naz is and always has been a cock,a great entertainer but talked so much poo

all very good points. Mcguigan fought and beat a far far higher level. Pedroza, a upcoming Laporte, Bernard taylor who was better than Johnson....u know what u convinced me. I take Barry now on points!

hamed would have schooled him.

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Coco wrote:
When did Hamed go over the hill? When Barrera started punching his face?

I picked Barrera going in, and it wasn't because there was any evidence of the 27 year old Hamed being "over the hill". Your logic seems to be when he was a WBO champ boxing handpicked WBO opponents at home he looked fantastic therefore was in his prime, when he was in Vegas in a big fight vs an all-round beast and found himself outgunned he was suddenly over the hill.

Perhaps Barrera was just much better than everybody Hamed had ever faced - that two-fisted reality check he gave the Prince ran him right out of boxing.

You never noticed any decline in Hamed?
He was only ever WBO champ?
He only ever fought WBO handpicked opponents?

I noticed a pompous buffoon fall in love with his power. I noticed a deluded fool let his ego grow to the size of a. . . . 2016 Naseem Hamed waistline. I saw it so clearly I told everyone I knew who liked boxing (all 3 of them) Barrera would win.

But was Hamed "past his prime"? No. Did he win belts better than the WBO? Of course, whenever the champ looked ready for the taking. And then vacate them so that he could continue to pick & choose WBO challengers. Hence my post. The meaning behind what I wrote was clear and I excised the alphabet juggling to keep it punchy.

Naz beat all the other champions. The closest Finbar got to Azumah Nelson was losing to Jim McDonnell.

And the closest Naz got to an Azumah Nelson-quality elite-level fighter was Barrera, where he was painfully outclassed.

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Pugilist-specialist wrote: Tyson hadn't been world champ for 8 years when he fought Williams - it's hardly comparable to McGuigan losing to Cruz on his third defence.

And you've proved my point by feeling the need to contextualise the Tyson vs Williams situation rather than accepting it as a stand-alone fact. You've defeated your own previous argument.

Anyone who has felt the need to use the word "contextualise" on a boxing forum has lost the argument

This is coming from a man having to use tiny pedantism to make his arguments.

My gut feeling is that McGuigan was better. But styles are in Hamed's favour. He'd be looking to land concussive power shots on a man moving towards him.

McGuigan had good power in his left hook. Enough to turn a fight in his favour at any moment. But he wasn't off the scale like Naz.

I just expect McGuigan's energy and body punching to win the day. But as has been said it's very tight and I wouldn't bet on the outcome.

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:
I noticed a pompous buffoon fall in love with his power. I noticed a deluded fool let his ego grow to the size of a. . . . 2016 Naseem Hamed waistline. I saw it so clearly I told everyone I knew who liked boxing (all 3 of them) Barrera would win.

But was Hamed "past his prime"? No. Did he win belts better than the WBO? Of course, whenever the champ looked ready for the taking. And then vacate them so that he could continue to pick & choose WBO challengers. Hence my post. The meaning behind what I wrote was clear and I excised the alphabet juggling to keep it punchy.

Naz beat all the other champions. The closest Finbar got to Azumah Nelson was losing to Jim McDonnell.

And the closest Naz got to an Azumah Nelson-quality elite-level fighter was Barrera, where he was painfully outclassed.

Yes, but at least he faced Barrera, Mcguigan and his team wanted absolutely no part of him. It would have been an absolute mauling if they had, and they damned well knew it. I respect McGuigan as a fighter, but that was one fight he didn't fancy one bit.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Pugilist-specialist wrote:
Naz beat all the other champions. The closest Finbar got to Azumah Nelson was losing to Jim McDonnell.

And the closest Naz got to an Azumah Nelson-quality elite-level fighter was Barrera, where he was painfully outclassed.

Yes, but at least he faced Barrera, Mcguigan and his team wanted absolutely no part of him. It would have been an absolute mauling if they had, and they damned well knew it. I respect McGuigan as a fighter, but that was one fight he didn't fancy one bit.

Yes, they fought Barrera because he was moving up and had been KOd by Junior Jones. You can't retroactively imbue MAB with the glamour and prestige he gained by bashing Naz.

I freely admit that I thought Naz would beat Barrera, simply because I couldn't see Barrera taking Hamed's big shots after being so conclusively beaten by Junior Jones.

The question should whose era are we talking when we pitch these two guys together. McGuigan's same day title fight weigh in and 15 rounds or Hamed's day before weigh in and 12 rounds? Personally I feel that McGuigan would have more of an edge in Hamed's era as Naz would have to have been more focussed on his training to make weight for a fight on the same day and consequently his skills sharper than during his actual reign. With extra pounds on fight night and with his busy style McGuigan would have been stronger and hit harder.

People forget how good Barry was. Just remember he boxed the head of Juan Laporte who a year later would be losing a split decision to Julio Cesar Chavez for the super featherweight title. If Barry had moved up in weight after the Cabrera fight to go after Gomez I think his legacy would have been much different.

Ketchel wrote:.

People forget how good Barry was. Just remember he boxed the head of Juan Laporte who a year later would be losing a split decision to Julio Cesar Chavez for the super featherweight title.

Yes.

I'm not underestimating Barry, but I think the style matchup heavily favours Naz, he'd have had an onrushing target and his footwork would have posed a lot of problems for McGuigan who tended from memory to come in, in pretty straight lines.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I'm not underestimating Barry, but I think the style matchup heavily favours Naz, he'd have had an onrushing target and his footwork would have posed a lot of problems for McGuigan who tended from memory to come in, in pretty straight lines.

at his best he was constantly moving his head and moving from the waist, he absolutely would not be trudging round the ring like Steve Robinson, as one particularly inapposite comparison had it earlier.

Counter-puncher wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I'm not underestimating Barry, but I think the style matchup heavily favours Naz, he'd have had an onrushing target and his footwork would have posed a lot of problems for McGuigan who tended from memory to come in, in pretty straight lines.

at his best he was constantly moving his head and moving from the waist, he absolutely would not be trudging round the ring like Steve Robinson, as one particularly inapposite comparison had it earlier.

I meant his footwork, not his upper body movement, I know he did feint a lot and use his upper body, but he tended to move in straight, rather than around the target.

A prime Naz had great footwork, and was able to catch people off guard with punches that came from very unexpected places.

Ketchel wrote:The question should whose era are we talking when we pitch these two guys together. McGuigan's same day title fight weigh in and 15 rounds or Hamed's day before weigh in and 12 rounds? Personally I feel that McGuigan would have more of an edge in Hamed's era as Naz would have to have been more focussed on his training to make weight for a fight on the same day and consequently his skills sharper than during his actual reign. With extra pounds on fight night and with his busy style McGuigan would have been stronger and hit harder.

very good point. Plus I think Barrys skin would have been a lot tougher too with modern day weigh in protocols. The constant boiling yourself down, missing nutrients to make weight thinned the skin.

Bricks wrote:

Ketchel wrote:The question should whose era are we talking when we pitch these two guys together. McGuigan's same day title fight weigh in and 15 rounds or Hamed's day before weigh in and 12 rounds? Personally I feel that McGuigan would have more of an edge in Hamed's era as Naz would have to have been more focussed on his training to make weight for a fight on the same day and consequently his skills sharper than during his actual reign. With extra pounds on fight night and with his busy style McGuigan would have been stronger and hit harder.

very good point. Plus I think Barrys skin would have been a lot tougher too with modern day weigh in protocols. The constant boiling yourself down, missing nutrients to make weight thinned the skin.

Yes great point. But again if I had to bet my life I would go Hamed. Although I remember, slight, light punching but tough McCullough going the distance when I though he would be massacred...

TheLeprechaun wrote:They say that McGuigan would win. Based on him being better than Ingle and McCullough who both did OK although they were beaten soundly. I reckon prime Naz beats Barry fairly handily. Probably makes him gunshy for a 12 round decision.

Opinions?

Naz personal thoughts on the fight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D0l0N-PC-s

Naz would have destroyed him iside the distance McGuigan not in same league