BoxRec

hitman_hatton1 wrote:needs to get his finger out and do an autobiography.

enough time has gone by.

he certainly has a story to tell.

I don't envy the editor, correcting "ennit" and "safe" thousands of times.

MachoMan09 wrote:

mugabi wrote:whether u like him or dont like him in the ring or his personality. I dont think anyone with any fairness can question he is a fantastic family man, son, brother and husband and a wonderful success as a businessman, I understand he owns 50 or 60 houses.

Have long have you know Naz, mate? You must be on very good terms to be able to state unquestionably that he is a fantastic family man, son, brother and husband. Since the internet came about, one of the things that has surprised me most is just how many people know celebrities and the manner in which they conduct themselves in private.

Hidden cameras in his house.

Quixall wrote:

safeerah wrote:

Quixall wrote:These threads always descend into people talking utter bollocks on both sides of the argument. Unfortunately, Naz will always divide opinon, the same as Mayweather, so any kind of attempt at objectivity goes straight out of the water !!

Smart Arse, everyone else is wrong but him, he knows what it is about Lol

It's true..........

He wasn't an all time great and yet neither was he some domestic plodder. The proof is in the pudding, who did he fight and who did he beat compared with his contemporaries. He was a good world champion who perhaps could have done more in the fight game. As for what he was like as a person, Johnny Nelson sums him up. Johnny says that a bloke approached Naz in his Bentley when they were both in the car and this guy had a small child with him. The guy asked Naz for an autograph and Naz told him to Fuk off. It was enough for Nelson to give him the rods. I personally met the guy and he was a dick.

We are not evaluating him as a person, just a fighter and you should not quote of hearsay, thats stupid, bearing in mind you don't know him, I took Nasser Al Harbi to spar Kel Brook in hamed's old gym and spent a lot of time chatting with Brendan Ingle about Naseem Hamed, he spoke well of him and described him as the best fighter this country had ever produced ( this coming from a man that has produced many great champions ) he also felt it was Naseem's family that ruined there relationship and described him as a good kid and awesome fighter, I would not say he was like an angel, but who is.

safeerah wrote:

Quixall wrote:

safeerah wrote:Smart Arse, everyone else is wrong but him, he knows what it is about Lol

It's true..........

He wasn't an all time great and yet neither was he some domestic plodder. The proof is in the pudding, who did he fight and who did he beat compared with his contemporaries. He was a good world champion who perhaps could have done more in the fight game. As for what he was like as a person, Johnny Nelson sums him up. Johnny says that a bloke approached Naz in his Bentley when they were both in the car and this guy had a small child with him. The guy asked Naz for an autograph and Naz told him to Fuk off. It was enough for Nelson to give him the rods. I personally met the guy and he was a dick.

We are not evaluating him as a person, just a fighter and you should not quote of hearsay, thats stupid, bearing in mind you don't know him, I took Nasser Al Harbi to spar Kel Brook in hamed's old gym and spent a lot of time chatting with Brendan Ingle about Naseem Hamed, he spoke well of him and described him as the best fighter this country had ever produced ( this coming from a man that has produced many great champions ) he also felt it was Naseem's family that ruined there relationship and described him as a good kid and awesome fighter, I would not say he was like an angel, but who is.

The thread developed into talk of Hameds personality, family life etc. Brendan hasn't produced that many champions has he ? Good fighters, yes, but great champions ?? Brendan will no doubt tell you what he thinks you want to hear. I'm sure his private thoughts are somewhat different. I have met the kid myself and he is or was obnoxious. As a fighter he was very good, but as i said before, he is not a great fighter. The first real test he had, he lost and he was not particularly that good in the previous fights running up to the Barrera fight. He isn't the best fighter this country produced, far from it !!

Quixall wrote:

safeerah wrote:

Quixall wrote: It's true..........

He wasn't an all time great and yet neither was he some domestic plodder. The proof is in the pudding, who did he fight and who did he beat compared with his contemporaries. He was a good world champion who perhaps could have done more in the fight game. As for what he was like as a person, Johnny Nelson sums him up. Johnny says that a bloke approached Naz in his Bentley when they were both in the car and this guy had a small child with him. The guy asked Naz for an autograph and Naz told him to Fuk off. It was enough for Nelson to give him the rods. I personally met the guy and he was a dick.[/quote)
We are not evaluating him as a person, just a fighter and you should not quote of hearsay, thats stupid, bearing in mind you don't know him, I took Nasser Al Harbi to spar Kel Brook in hamed's old gym and spent a lot of time chatting with Brendan Ingle about Naseem Hamed, he spoke well of him and described him as the best fighter this country had ever produced ( this coming from a man that has produced many great champions ) he also felt it was Naseem's family that ruined there relationship and described him as a good kid and awesome fighter, I would not say he was like an angel, but who is.

The thread developed into talk of Hameds personality, family life etc. Brendan hasn't produced that many champions has he ? Good fighters, yes, but great champions ?? Brendan will no doubt tell you what he thinks you want to hear. I'm sure his private thoughts are somewhat different. I have met the kid myself and he is or was obnoxious. As a fighter he was very good, but as i said before, he is not a great fighter. The first real test he had, he lost and he was not particularly that good in the previous fights running up to the Barrera fight. He isn't the best fighter this country produced, far from it !!

You are an Idiot mate, how many world champions have you produced, I hate it when negative people like you, try to devalue the achievements of others, Brendan has well as Enzo are two of the most successfull trainers this country has produced and Nas has beat around 7 world champions, if I was you I would talk about another sport, because you know nothing about boxing, try weather forecasting, then you tell everyone what a shitty weekend we will be having.

safeerah wrote:

Quixall wrote:

safeerah wrote: The thread developed into talk of Hameds personality, family life etc. Brendan hasn't produced that many champions has he ? Good fighters, yes, but great champions ?? Brendan will no doubt tell you what he thinks you want to hear. I'm sure his private thoughts are somewhat different. I have met the kid myself and he is or was obnoxious. As a fighter he was very good, but as i said before, he is not a great fighter. The first real test he had, he lost and he was not particularly that good in the previous fights running up to the Barrera fight. He isn't the best fighter this country produced, far from it !!

You are an Idiot mate, how many world champions have you produced, I hate it when negative people like you, try to devalue the achievements of others, Brendan has well as Enzo are two of the most successfull trainers this country has produced and Nas has beat around 7 world champions, if I was you I would talk about another sport, because you know nothing about boxing, try weather forecasting, then you tell everyone what a shitty weekend we will be having.

You have lost the argument and so have to resort to being rude. I am not a boxing trainer and so it is pretty obvious that i have not produced boxing champions. I have not devalued any of Brendan's achievements, merely put them in a proper context. The only world champions to come out of Brendan's gym have been Hamed and Nelson, the rest were decent to good domestic or Euro fighters such as Rhodes, Anderson and Graham was a world class fighter who had bad luck. Hamed was a very good champion and Nelson also, but they could not be described as great champions. This clearly highlights that you know very little about how to judge a fighter's acomplishments or get passed your bias childishness to give some cold hearted objectivety. I repeat, Hamed was a very good fighter, but he wasn't a great fighter and his record proves it. Compare his record to that of his contempories such as Marquez, Barrera and Morales and you will see that it is you who should be warning people of impending water droughts.

Quixall wrote: You have lost the argument and so have to resort to being rude. I am not a boxing trainer and so it is pretty obvious that i have not produced boxing champions. I have not devalued any of Brendan's achievements, merely put them in a proper context. The only world champions to come out of Brendan's gym have been Hamed and Nelson, the rest were decent to good domestic or Euro fighters such as Rhodes, Anderson and Graham was a world class fighter who had bad luck. Hamed was a very good champion and Nelson also, but they could not be described as great champions. This clearly highlights that you know very little about how to judge a fighter's acomplishments or get passed your bias childishness to give some cold hearted objectivety. I repeat, Hamed was a very good fighter, but he wasn't a great fighter and his record proves it. Compare his record to that of his contempories such as Marquez, Barrera and Morales and you will see that it is you who should be warning people of impending water droughts.

What about Woods and Witter?

Quixall wrote:

safeerah wrote:

Quixall wrote:

You are an Idiot mate, how many world champions have you produced, I hate it when negative people like you, try to devalue the achievements of others, Brendan has well as Enzo are two of the most successfull trainers this country has produced and Nas has beat around 7 world champions, if I was you I would talk about another sport, because you know nothing about boxing, try weather forecasting, then you tell everyone what a shitty weekend we will be having.

You have lost the argument and so have to resort to being rude. I am not a boxing trainer and so it is pretty obvious that i have not produced boxing champions. I have not devalued any of Brendan's achievements, merely put them in a proper context. The only world champions to come out of Brendan's gym have been Hamed and Nelson, the rest were decent to good domestic or Euro fighters such as Rhodes, Anderson and Graham was a world class fighter who had bad luck. Hamed was a very good champion and Nelson also, but they could not be described as great champions. This clearly highlights that you know very little about how to judge a fighter's acomplishments or get passed your bias childishness to give some cold hearted objectivety. I repeat, Hamed was a very good fighter, but he wasn't a great fighter and his record proves it. Compare his record to that of his contempories such as Marquez, Barrera and Morales and you will see that it is you who should be warning people of impending water droughts.

What about Junior Witter smart arse, I bet you rate McGiuggan's achievements though, the reason I don't respect your opinion is because you ignore what anyone else says in their argument and you assume you know everything, which you don't, I would like to know who you do rate, I will give you time to troll through the internet first, then maybe you can enlighten me. I work in the industry, your an armchair expert. Anyone who beats a world champion is a great fighter in my book, bearing in mind thousands don't, never mind beating 7 world champions. I seen Naseem put an heavyweight on his backside in sparring, he stood trading with him, before Brendan stopped it form getting out of hand. How many featherweights could do that ? You know what you still wont except you are wrong no matter what anyone produces.

I dont think you can see how ironic you are being, because the very same things that you acuse me of doing, you do yourself. All you keep saying is that he beat seven world champions, but that doesn't mean he is a great fighter. I think your sentence about watching Hamed knock about a heavyweight proves that you are too close to the subject to give it any objectivety. All that proves is that Hamed had power and no-one is denying that anyway, but i bet the heavyweight was just some domestic plodder come doorman type. I couldn't care less is you are in the industry it's all about opinions and yours is no more valid than anyone else's. There are hundreds who "work in the industry" and the fact that you have to mention that to try and quantify and bolster your arguments is rather pathetic.

I don't need to troll through the internet finding fighters who i think are great fighters. I already said that Marquez, Morales and Pacquaio were examples of fighters who fought the best and if they lost had re-matches, unlike Hamed who didn't take up his re-match clause against Barrera. A great fighters list would include people who won championships against the very best and beat opposition in their prime. The list is endless, Duran, Hearns, Leonard, Chavez, Sanchez, De La Hoya. Even these struggle with the likes of Robinson, Armstrong and Wilde. You just can't accept that Hamed was more hype than reality. By your terms the likes of Rees and Cleverley were and are great champions.

Put up a thread and ask whether people see him as a great fighter that could compare to Morales, Barrera or Pacquaio. They would all say no. Ask people if they think he was a nob and they will almost to a man say yes. Then ask if he was an entertainer that gave good value and excitement and you will get a definate yes. Regardless of what you say, his record speaks for itself, the proof is in the pudding. He beat ageing champions like Johnson, ordinary champions like Robinson, guys slightly out of prime and shop worn like Kelley. The only fighter he faced that was in his prime and seen as the first real threat was Barrera and he lost and didn't seek a re-match. That is all you need to know and concentrate on.

Quixall wrote:I dont think you can see how ironic you are being, because the very same things that you acuse me of doing, you do yourself. All you keep saying is that he beat seven world champions, but that doesn't mean he is a great fighter. I think your sentence about watching Hamed knock about a heavyweight proves that you are too close to the subject to give it any objectivety. All that proves is that Hamed had power and no-one is denying that anyway, but i bet the heavyweight was just some domestic plodder come doorman type. I couldn't care less is you are in the industry it's all about opinions and yours is no more valid than anyone else's. There are hundreds who "work in the industry" and the fact that you have to mention that to try and quantify and bolster your arguments is rather pathetic.

I don't need to troll through the internet finding fighters who i think are great fighters. I already said that Marquez, Morales and Pacquaio were examples of fighters who fought the best and if they lost had re-matches, unlike Hamed who didn't take up his re-match clause against Barrera. A great fighters list would include people who won championships against the very best and beat opposition in their prime. The list is endless, Duran, Hearns, Leonard, Chavez, Sanchez, De La Hoya. Even these struggle with the likes of Robinson, Armstrong and Wilde. You just can't accept that Hamed was more hype than reality. By your terms the likes of Rees and Cleverley were and are great champions.

Put up a thread and ask whether people see him as a great fighter that could compare to Morales, Barrera or Pacquaio. They would all say no. Ask people if they think he was a nob and they will almost to a man say yes. Then ask if he was an entertainer that gave good value and excitement and you will get a definate yes. Regardless of what you say, his record speaks for itself, the proof is in the pudding. He beat ageing champions like Johnson, ordinary champions like Robinson, guys slightly out of prime and shop worn like Kelley. The only fighter he faced that was in his prime and seen as the first real threat was Barrera and he lost and didn't seek a re-match. That is all you need to know and concentrate on.

Firstly you stupid prat, I am not close to Naseem, I seen it on video and the heavyweight was a british champion, you have not got a clue, have you, I bet you sit in front of the computer all day, that's where you get your limited knowledge from, instead of someone like me who has practical experience, it's like a going to the monkey instead of the organ grinder. Naseem held held his title for 5 years and then vacated it, before going for others, he beat Robinson ( who had beat 3 former world champs ) he beat Medina who in turn won a world title himself, he beat Ingle who in turn won a world afterwards, he beat Johnson who had held his title for 5 years, he beat Kelley who was 3 time world champ, he beat Hardy inside a round ( who had lost a split decision for a world title, when every thought he had won easily )Believe me I could give you more examples, but it would be a waste. How can you compare Rees who won a world title against an ordinary champ and lost in his first defence and Cleverley who had his title given to him with my argument, you must be mad or stupid. If Naseem's hands had not gone he would have destroyed Barrera( like Jr Jones )and smashed morales, who are both easy to hit and have been stopped, Naseem was never stopped, even when he was unfit, unmotivated, uninterested and with damaged hands he only lost on points to a Barrera on the top of his game, can you imagine if it was the other way round, pure destruction. Just to rub it in I have never met Naseem in my life.

Stop being an immature prick.............

You stated that anyone who won a world championship was a great fighter, so that's why i mentioned Rees and Cleverley, as examples of fighters who have won world titles and certainly cannot be considered "great" fighters. It was an example of how lame your initial argument was to label all world champions great fighters. All the fighters that Hamed beat at world level were not in their primes. The only one was in his prime or approaching his prime was Barrera and Hamed lost to him, not because of any lack of power through damaged hands, but because he was out thought and out-skilled and Hamed was too one dimensional in his approach. How on earth you can say that Hamed would have destoyed Barrera with such certainty only makes me think you are either, in your words, "mad or stupid" or you clearly don't know what you are talking about. Then you casually mention that he would have "smashed" Morales . That statement if nothing else proves to me that you are somone who puts his off the cuff comments ahead of rational debate. I won't waste anymore time on you. I have made my point and it was very simple. Hamed was a very good fighter, but he was not a great fighter, because great fighters beat other recognised great fighters in their primes and he lost to Barrera and effectively retired. As i said earlier, just look at his record. He beat good champions but not great champions and it's all there on his record. Case closed

bugs wrote:

Quixall wrote: You have lost the argument and so have to resort to being rude. I am not a boxing trainer and so it is pretty obvious that i have not produced boxing champions. I have not devalued any of Brendan's achievements, merely put them in a proper context. The only world champions to come out of Brendan's gym have been Hamed and Nelson, the rest were decent to good domestic or Euro fighters such as Rhodes, Anderson and Graham was a world class fighter who had bad luck. Hamed was a very good champion and Nelson also, but they could not be described as great champions. This clearly highlights that you know very little about how to judge a fighter's acomplishments or get passed your bias childishness to give some cold hearted objectivety. I repeat, Hamed was a very good fighter, but he wasn't a great fighter and his record proves it. Compare his record to that of his contempories such as Marquez, Barrera and Morales and you will see that it is you who should be warning people of impending water droughts.

What about Woods and Witter?

did brendan train Woods? I thought he was with howard rainey?

The reason Naz did not fight MAB the first time is because Junior Jones knocked him out and then decisioned him in a rematch.
That Naz IMO would have def beat that MAB, however since then Naz did decline, ignored his boxing and relied on his one punch power. Those defeats actually did MAB a world of good and he came back a much cannier and better fighter. Peak v peak would have been an incredible matchup.
People have often criticised FW about his safety first match making but he was willing for Naz to fight anyone, as he was for Calzaghe

naz was one of them fighters that when he was around everyone hated him and wanted to see him lose but then when he retires we all look back and think "wasnt he great" i miss him he was great for the sport and backed most of what he said up great fighter and an even better entertainer

bugs wrote:

Quixall wrote: You have lost the argument and so have to resort to being rude. I am not a boxing trainer and so it is pretty obvious that i have not produced boxing champions. I have not devalued any of Brendan's achievements, merely put them in a proper context. The only world champions to come out of Brendan's gym have been Hamed and Nelson, the rest were decent to good domestic or Euro fighters such as Rhodes, Anderson and Graham was a world class fighter who had bad luck. Hamed was a very good champion and Nelson also, but they could not be described as great champions. This clearly highlights that you know very little about how to judge a fighter's acomplishments or get passed your bias childishness to give some cold hearted objectivety. I repeat, Hamed was a very good fighter, but he wasn't a great fighter and his record proves it. Compare his record to that of his contempories such as Marquez, Barrera and Morales and you will see that it is you who should be warning people of impending water droughts.

What about Woods and Witter?

what wood? clinton woods? i dont think he was trained by brendan ingle ya know mate.

Quixall wrote:

safeerah wrote:

Quixall wrote:These threads always descend into people talking utter bollocks on both sides of the argument. Unfortunately, Naz will always divide opinon, the same as Mayweather, so any kind of attempt at objectivity goes straight out of the water !!

Smart Arse, everyone else is wrong but him, he knows what it is about Lol

It's true..........

He wasn't an all time great and yet neither was he some domestic plodder. The proof is in the pudding, who did he fight and who did he beat compared with his contemporaries. He was a good world champion who perhaps could have done more in the fight game. As for what he was like as a person, Johnny Nelson sums him up. Johnny says that a bloke approached Naz in his Bentley when they were both in the car and this guy had a small child with him. The guy asked Naz for an autograph and Naz told him to Fuk off. It was enough for Nelson to give him the rods. I personally met the guy and he was a dick.

this has just changed my whole opinion of him,what a gobshite he is, I think Ryan Rhodes has the same type of attitude as naz I was in the changing rooms in Everton sports centre with a friend who was fighting once and Ryan Rhodes was there and he stood on his own didn't mingle with anyone and didn't even say hello just stood there with a frown across his face,and he wasn't there fighting he was there with people he knew,who were fighting.

Quixall wrote:Stop being an immature prick.............

You stated that anyone who won a world championship was a great fighter, so that's why i mentioned Rees and Cleverley, as examples of fighters who have won world titles and certainly cannot be considered "great" fighters. It was an example of how lame your initial argument was to label all world champions great fighters. All the fighters that Hamed beat at world level were not in their primes. The only one was in his prime or approaching his prime was Barrera and Hamed lost to him, not because of any lack of power through damaged hands, but because he was out thought and out-skilled and Hamed was too one dimensional in his approach. How on earth you can say that Hamed would have destoyed Barrera with such certainty only makes me think you are either, in your words, "mad or stupid" or you clearly don't know what you are talking about. Then you casually mention that he would have "smashed" Morales . That statement if nothing else proves to me that you are somone who puts his off the cuff comments ahead of rational debate. I won't waste anymore time on you. I have made my point and it was very simple. Hamed was a very good fighter, but he was not a great fighter, because great fighters beat other recognised great fighters in their primes and he lost to Barrera and effectively retired. As i said earlier, just look at his record. He beat good champions but not great champions and it's all there on his record. Case closed

Just shows what a little boy you are you even put faces on Lol, I will tell you what, I feel sorry for boxers now, because you can win a world title and then beat 7 world champions and still not be a great fighter in this prat's book, stick to your job at Mc Donalds and leave us industry people to do our thing Lol.

and yet you come across really, really mature yourself, like.

Counter-puncher wrote:and yet you come across really, really mature yourself, like.

Alias ?

What industy are you in?

Coco wrote:The reason Naz did not fight MAB the first time is because Junior Jones knocked him out and then decisioned him in a rematch.
That Naz IMO would have def beat that MAB, however since then Naz did decline, ignored his boxing and relied on his one punch power. Those defeats actually did MAB a world of good and he came back a much cannier and better fighter. Peak v peak would have been an incredible matchup.
People have often criticised FW about his safety first match making but he was willing for Naz to fight anyone, as he was for Calzaghe

Well said mate, someone who knows his Boxing

safeerah wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:and yet you come across really, really mature yourself, like.

Alias ?

'Counter-puncher' is not the name my parents gave me, no.

Counter-puncher wrote:

safeerah wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:and yet you come across really, really mature yourself, like.

Alias ?

'Counter-puncher' is not the name my parents gave me, no.

No ? Shit ! I wonder what it could be ?

Coco wrote:What industy are you in?

The fight game mate

fasteddie wrote:

Quixall wrote:

safeerah wrote:Smart Arse, everyone else is wrong but him, he knows what it is about Lol

It's true..........

He wasn't an all time great and yet neither was he some domestic plodder. The proof is in the pudding, who did he fight and who did he beat compared with his contemporaries. He was a good world champion who perhaps could have done more in the fight game. As for what he was like as a person, Johnny Nelson sums him up. Johnny says that a bloke approached Naz in his Bentley when they were both in the car and this guy had a small child with him. The guy asked Naz for an autograph and Naz told him to Fuk off. It was enough for Nelson to give him the rods. I personally met the guy and he was a dick.

this has just changed my whole opinion of him,what a gobshite he is, I think Ryan Rhodes has the same type of attitude as naz I was in the changing rooms in Everton sports centre with a friend who was fighting once and Ryan Rhodes was there and he stood on his own didn't mingle with anyone and didn't even say hello just stood there with a frown across his face,and he wasn't there fighting he was there with people he knew,who were fighting.

I don't know if these things are true or not about Naseem, If they are it is not good on Naseems part, but if they are not true, then it is not right to ruin an ex fighters rep. A friend of mine runs an amatuer gym in Birmingham, only a small one, that is not well funded, they have a lot of kids fighting for them, last year they organised a home show and asked the manager of a top boxer, if his boxer could hand out trophy's for the kids and have his picture taken ect.. The manager asked for £7,000, they then rung a friend of a friend of Naseem and Naseem traveled on his own expense, for no fee and handed out trophys, joked and played with the kids, posed for photos and then went for a meal with some of the adults from the club, so he can't be all bad. Before smart arse comes back on with "how do you know it it's true ? " I seen the pictures.