BoxRec

Who would win and why ?

Pep would out-box Naz with ease... if Barrera could out-box Hamed you can bet that Pep would have a pretty easy time of it. Hamed was a great talent but flawed in that he was too arrogant and didn't ultilize his true potential.

silkov wrote:Pep would out-box Naz with ease... if Barrera could out-box Hamed you can bet that Pep would have a pretty easy time of it. Hamed was a great talent but flawed in that he was too arrogant and didn't ultilize his true potential.

Ma8.. we are talking about Naz at his prim not with Barara . Naz by a late TKO

Pep would be far too clever for Naz.

IMO Pep gets his ring beat in we are talking about the prime of NAZ when he was hungry so to speech using superior strength he cuts him down and KO's him late.

Pep easily on points, Pep could demand respect with his punching which sometimes gets overlooked. Medina did very well against a peak Naz, Pep had the better punch and better boxing of the two so would have beaten Naz along the same route as Barrera.

Yeah thats why he has like the lowest % of KO's in his career he may have been a great with good skill but his punching power has no bragging rights while NAZ thats like all he has to brag about .

Pep certainly did not hit anything like Hamed could, few featherweights ever did.
But a 25% KO rate is hardly one to be ignored, especially when your overall record is something like 230 fights.
Hamed was washed up almost two hundred fights sooner than Pep.

Whereas i believe pep is an overrated, untouchable, white american poster institution, i feel that his style is all wrong for naz. Barerra used the simple rouse of hanging back,waiting for the notorious naz lunge, then punishing him with counters. Willie would simply dance all night and pepper hamed with jabs. Naz has a puncher's chance if he can nail wilie if he stays too long inside throwing prolonged combinations, but i just see him chasing pep all night. Pep UD.

Yeah suppose you guys ate making a point MAB could do that and Pep is alot beter fighter than MAB well maybe.

IN HIS PRIME, NO ONE COULD BEAT PEP.......RICHBART

Irishlad69 wrote:Whereas i believe pep is an overrated, untouchable, white american poster institution

what fights have u seen of pep???



I was watching 27 year old pep today in his fight vs ray famachon. pep is simply one of the greatest ring technicians of all time IMO, and he wasnt even at his best in the ray famachon.

IMO pep would box circles around hamed who would get very frustrated he wasnt able to land big punches on pep. Pep's masterful defense consisting of incredible feints,shoulder slipping, ducking, weaving in an out, masterful footwork would give hamed fits. Hamed would be outclassed and find himself on the wrong end of a one sided drubbing. What made pep incredible was after he made u miss, he would deliver the fastest counterpunches ud ever seen, and pep would deliver them at all different angles making pep very unpredictable. HE was especiialy unpredictable when he got cute with his body shifts you didnt know where the punches were coming from. Pep would make you become off balance and a hittable vunerable target. Pep even in a clinch would snap ur head and spin you into a 180 making u off balance and a open target. pep was not only a cutie and a little dirty at times, he was a smart master boxer, one of the best fighters of all time.

pep 15 unanimous dec hamed








hamed was 26 and in his prime vs MAB, dont kid yourself

Pep all the way by easy UD. 12 rounds or 20, it doesn't matter. The man is a legend, a master boxer, and Naz is an unorthodox power puncher with questionable balance and a disreguard for fundamentals which he only got away with because of youth, speed, and power (see RJJ). Pep (His real name is Papaleo) beats Naz, by quick footwork and confuses Naz who isn't used to being befuddled by an opponent. Heck, I might venture to say Pep might get him down in the middle to late rounds as well (not from a power shot, but a shot where he catches Naz showboating, off balance- just like Kevin Kelly did to him)!

Pep easily , Hamed was overrated and got exposed by Barrera while in his prime.

Pep wins easily. He gets a UD 15 and maybe wins 12-15 of the rounds. Naz stopped improving after he won the title and just relied on his power. He had the power to be an all-time great but sadly did not work on his skill.

Pep by embarassing UD -- a 12-0 or 15-0 shutout. Would probably also KD Naz a few times as Naz was off balance often, and Pep was a master counter-puncher.

I've watched a lot of Hamed in his prime, and I have to say - I hate watching him. His style is damn ugly... He often loses his balance, his punches are thrown from the floor and his defense is almost non-existent. His punches were great when they actually landed... But the guy missed so much.

Pep would decision this guy fairly easily I think.

Naz was an amatuerish fighter with some power. Pep schools him.

{amateur} wrote:Yeah thats why he has like the lowest % of KO's in his career he may have been a great with good skill but his punching power has no bragging rights while NAZ thats like all he has to brag about .

Pep's 25% KO rate, which out of 230 fights, is 57 fights won by KO. That's still more than total fights by Hamed.

And, a boxer does not need to KO someone to win impressively. Willie Pep would have toyed and frustrated Hamed, making him look like a rank amateur.

Hamed's prime was around 1994/95, he looked awful after the Robinson fight and then absolutely terrible on HBO. He stopped training, got way over-confident.

He was the best young prospect ever seen, though.

Decagon wrote:

Ben Keilty wrote:Pep easily , Hamed was overrated and got exposed by Barrera while in his prime.

Hamed was slowing down with just about every fight leading up to the Barerra bout. His fight with Barerra wasn't like Tyson's against Douglas, where he was still at the top of his game but CHOSE not to train; you could see Hamed slipping years before Barerra gave him his first loss.

26 not in prime, He must be a very early developer. Did he go threw puberty at 5 .

Ben Keilty wrote:

Decagon wrote:

Ben Keilty wrote:Pep easily , Hamed was overrated and got exposed by Barrera while in his prime.

Hamed was slowing down with just about every fight leading up to the Barerra bout. His fight with Barerra wasn't like Tyson's against Douglas, where he was still at the top of his game but CHOSE not to train; you could see Hamed slipping years before Barerra gave him his first loss.

26 not in prime, He must be a very early developer. Did he go threw puberty at 5 .

Better than Tyson. His more rabid fans had him washed up at 24. What other possible explanation could there be for him actually losing a fight?

He changed the way he fought after Robinson, started concerntrating on trying to knock everyone out with a huge shot and neglected his training.

I don't think Hamed is great and he lacks a lot of fundimentals, but you can't argue he was the same fighter against Soto and Barrera that he was early in his career. Barrera might still have beaten him and Pep certainly would have making him look like an amature at the same time

Greg Nicholas wrote:Hamed's prime was around 1994/95, he looked awful after the Robinson fight and then absolutely terrible on HBO. He stopped training, got way over-confident.

He was the best young prospect ever seen, though.

Its laughable really that a boxer who even his fans only get him as having a 1yr prime gets compared to a great like Pep.

He looked worse by every fight after Steve Robinson because he was beginning to step up in class...and was soon out of his class

And the best prospect ever seen??

tonyevs wrote:He looked worse by every fight after Steve Robinson because he was beginning to step up in class...and was soon out of his class

Not so.

He had fairly impressive performances against Tom Johnson, Wilfredo Vazquez, Billy Hardy , Wayne McCullough, Paul Ingle and Vuyani Bungu.

Those fights happened after he fought Robinson and all of said fighters were of a higer class than Robinson.