BoxRec

The Rise and Fall of Naseem Hamed (Pt. 1)

http://3morerounds.com/columns/the-rise ... eem-hamed/

Gotta say, I do miss seeing Naz come down the aisle.

Wont get any better than the Naz days.

Some people say that when they meet their "idols" etc they were dissapointed, i met Naz at one of the Burns fights in Braehead and he was spot on.

Emmseegee wrote:Wont get any better than the Naz days.

Some people say that when they meet their "idols" etc they were dissapointed, i met Naz at one of the Burns fights in Braehead and he was spot on.

I met Naz and he looked at me like i was one of his next opponents lol............

It was after the Barrera fight and he was telling me about his next fight with Manuel Calvo. I miss Naz, he brought boxing alive along with Benn and Eubank. I miss those times and wish i could re-wind the clock.

Id love it to be now that Naz was kickin about so that I could follow him properly, go to the fights etc.
At the time he was kicking about i was a little too young to enjoy it fully but still have fond memories of everyone sneaking carry outs into whatever house was hosting it and hoping that the dodgy cable boxes didnt get cut off during the fight. lol

Emmseegee wrote:Id love it to be now that Naz was kickin about so that I could follow him properly, go to the fights etc.
At the time he was kicking about i was a little too young to enjoy it fully but still have fond memories of everyone sneaking carry outs into whatever house was hosting it and hoping that the dodgy cable boxes didnt get cut off during the fight. lol

People can criticise Naz all they want regarding who he fought, didn't fight, the style he used, whether he abandoned his early style to focus only on his power shots, whether he should have fought Morales and Marquez etc etc, but the man was pure entertainment and in that respect gave a lot to the sport. Boxing nowadays is getting quite boring. There are no characters in British boxing, no-one that stands out at all. The nearest we have is Froch who has some personality and possibly Khan who can shake things up a little, but no-one comes anywhere near Naz for pure entertainment, razmataz and the fireworks that make a fight something to look forward to.

Naz could have been a genuine all-time great. What a talent.

dondada wrote:Naz could have been a genuine all-time great. What a talent.

True.............

His style would have always been slightly negated by the very top fighters, but he had enough punch power to make up that slight short fall. His main problem was that he virtually abandoned the early style that was so effective. It goes without saying that his early style wouldn't have caused as much trouble to Barrera than it it did to Robinson et al, but it would have been far more effective than his rather one dimensional style adopted towards the end of his career. The problems with his hands, plus the split from Brendan Ingle had a major impact on his career after the Kelley fight and of course a lot of the decisions made came from Naz himself. Still my favourite fighter to watch, no one today is anywhere near from the UK.

Thing is a lot seem to make out he fought nobodies before he fought Barerra. Lets have it right, Barerra and Morales were Super-bantamweights until just before Naz and Barerra squared off weren't they? I know it doesn't necassarily take much for them to step up but were there a long line of champs Naz didn't fight. Marquez he didn't fight, but at the time that fight could have been made Marquez wasn't marquee. So who else was there at the various stages of Naz's reign? Didn't he at one point beat every champ in the division? The belts might not have been on the line when they fought (it's been a while since I'v watched my collection but I don't often remember Naz carrying numerous belts to the ring) but wasn't Tom Johnson the IBF champ when they fought, Vasquez the WBA champ when they fought, and Soto was WBC champ when they fought? It certainly doesn't deserve to be lumped with the long WBO/WBU reigns we have seen other British fighters have in the last 20 years if he was fighting other champs, so I'm always suprised when people have a go at Naz's standard of opposition.

jameswilson wrote:Thing is a lot seem to make out he fought nobodies before he fought Barerra. Lets have it right, Barerra and Morales were Super-bantamweights until just before Naz and Barerra squared off weren't they? I know it doesn't necassarily take much for them to step up but were there a long line of champs Naz didn't fight. Marquez he didn't fight, but at the time that fight could have been made Marquez wasn't marquee. So who else was there at the various stages of Naz's reign? Didn't he at one point beat every champ in the division? The belts might not have been on the line when they fought (it's been a while since I'v watched my collection but I don't often remember Naz carrying numerous belts to the ring) but wasn't Tom Johnson the IBF champ when they fought, Vasquez the WBA champ when they fought, and Soto was WBC champ when they fought? It certainly doesn't deserve to be lumped with the long WBO/WBU reigns we have seen other British fighters have in the last 20 years if he was fighting other champs, so I'm always suprised when people have a go at Naz's standard of opposition.

I think a lot of people seem to criticise Naz for the Barrera fight itself and then afterwards. They see him as a big mouth who couldn't deal with the first real elite fighter that he faced, ie, Barrera. Some say he would have beaten Barrera had he kept with his earlier style and some say he just met a better fighter. I would say that he could and should have beaten Barrera, because he had all the skills to do so, but had become one dimensional by that point. The other point is that people point to the fact that Naz never sought a re-match with Barrera or went onto to fight Morales or Marquez. Some people were suprised that he packed in at 28 years of age, but Naz reckons it was partly because he was having to have cortisone injections because his hands used to swell up badly and he couldn't train as before.

I saw that documentary that followed Hamed's training reime before that fight and he looked awful. I think he beat some good opponents, but a lot of his image was built on his unbeaten record and when it went, some air came out of the tyres. I think Naz was not fully focused on boxing, the split with Ingle had a devastating effect, his hands were giving him problems, he had started a family, he was loaded with money and had gotten complacent towards his opponents as his fight with Kelley and Sanchez showed. Naz became a one punch merchant, when he had so much more in the locker than that, but if your not using it, your losing it, as they say and Naz just became one dimensional and slightly wild in his style. I also think that the events at the world trade centre didn't help his cause. Naz at that time was getting more religous in his pre and post fight comments and i think 9/11 spooked him somewhat and added to his decison to quit.

Barrera at his best beats Naz at his best for me.

I always think if Naz could of kept to super bantam weight he could of been unbeatable.

Old bones Ian wrote:I always think if Naz could of kept to super bantam weight he could of been unbeatable.

X100

No one would have laid a glove on him at SB.

G0mez wrote:Barrera at his best beats Naz at his best for me.

no way ! ( Jr Jones )

Old bones Ian wrote:I always think if Naz could of kept to super bantam weight he could of been unbeatable.

If only, you are right, he went up too easily to fight for the World title against Robinson, should gone back down afterwards an fought for title at that weight.

safeerah wrote:

G0mez wrote:Barrera at his best beats Naz at his best for me.

no way ! ( Jr Jones )

Barrera improved (you think he was at his best in 97?) and eventually defeated better opponents than Jones, so I don't understand your point.

My first naz fight was the Steve Robinson fight at Cardiff arms park in sept 95 I think, it was incredible, the best boxing occasion I've ever been to, the welsh were calling for his head before the fight and then queing up for miles just for a photo or an autograph after, I was boxing myself at the time and will never forget the new faces entering the gyms week after week and pretending they were naz on the bags, great times, boxing being so strong in the uk now and recently are partly due to naz.

jessi wrote:boxing being so strong in the uk now and recently are partly due to naz.

Agree with that 100%

Despite his flaws, I was a huge fan of Naseem Hamed.

He was so entertaining & so athletically gifted.

If he had focused on his boxing skills & dropped that pathological belief he had in his power, he could have been one of the best fighters that ever lived.

That aside, he still managed to rack up some impressive wins & there was never a dull moment during his career, save for his last fight.

crusader wrote:

safeerah wrote:

G0mez wrote:Barrera at his best beats Naz at his best for me.

no way ! ( Jr Jones )

Barrera improved (you think he was at his best in 97?) and eventually defeated better opponents than Jones, so I don't understand your point.

He was a monster before he lost to jones, after Jones he was more entertaining because people pushed him closer, so people assume he was at his best because of that, but he was beaten my morales and destroyed by Pacman later on, though he did make a come back as top flight fighter for Naz, can you emagine what Mayweather would have done with him, as Jones proved a boxer with a punch will always beat him. When Barrera fought Naz they where at different stages, the hands of Naz had gone and his interest in boxing had wavered, Naz was a shell of the man that terroriised the division, Barrera had just had lease of life and come off a great performance in his last fight, Naz did not even look good bodywise. Naz should have boxed Barrera not go looking for the one punch ko with bad hands, Barrera showed the respect he had for the power of Naz, because he boxed instead of his usual brawling style. For me both in top form Naz would box Barreras ears off then win by Ko.

Honestly I was a huge Hamed fan and it saddened me that Barrera took his will to fight away (even though I was rooting for a Barrera upset as I was a big fan too).

The entrances, the flip into the ring, the punishing uppercuts and brute power. Hamed had the flamboyance, style and flare to be one of the greats. Sucks he retired one fight after the loss to Barrera.

Ramon3MR wrote:Honestly I was a huge Hamed fan and it saddened me that Barrera took his will to fight away (even though I was rooting for a Barrera upset as I was a big fan too).

The entrances, the flip into the ring, the punishing uppercuts and brute power. Hamed had the flamboyance, style and flare to be one of the greats. Sucks he retired one fight after the loss to Barrera.

Funny how a lot of people wanted him to fall flat on his face, yet after he had retired they missed him so much, there was a void in boxing when he went, but he spawned a lot of Hamed lookalikes.

Naz's list of opponents at the top level would look great nowadays:

Robinson
Ingle
Vasquez
Hardy
McCulloch
Kelley
Soto
Bungu
Barrerra
Johnson

Even lower grade fighters like Sanchez, Badillo and Alicea are decent opponents.

This has been done to death but Naz was brilliant, unified his divisions and beat (and knocked out) a lot of very good fighters. Bear in mind he went to MSG fought a New yorker on his home turf, who was 47-1 at the time and knocked him out. The Kelley fight for me is criminally under rated as a result.

Bungu was unbeaten in years, Soto and Johnson were belt holders (as in essence was Vasquez). Hardy, McCulloch and Ingle were the best the UK had to offer.

He's a hall of famer and only a win against a Barrera, Morales or JMM stop him from being an all time great

I once read someone describe a prime Naz vs Pac matchup as '2 scorpions in a jam jar', thought that was a pretty good line. Would love to have seen Naz/Barrera in 96 when it was first bandied about.

I remember watching his debut, and thinking he looks alright, but i'm not convinced.

might have underestimated Naz there a bit

Old bones Ian wrote:I remember watching his debut, and thinking he looks alright, but i'm not convinced.

might have underestimated Naz there a bit

Brilliant admission. I remember seeing him against Belcastro and for the first few rounds thinking 'awesome' then for the rest thinking 'What a cheeky little sod!'