Boxing: Warren right to scorn Hamed's comeback
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Frank Warren is entirely right to cast scorn on Naseem Hamed's comeback. In his Sunday newspaper column Britain's leading promoter wrote under the headline, "The Ham act is a joke", that Hamed's fight for the meaningless International Boxing Organisation featherweight title against Manuel Calvo on Saturday "is perfect. Calvo is a non-puncher who will make him look good."
Reality visited Hamed in Las Vegas a year ago after he was beaten by the Mexican Marco Antonio Barrera.
Kerry Davis, an executive of Home Box Office which had poured millions of dollars into making Hamed an authentic draw in America, said his company had only one lingering interest in a fighter so ridiculously hyped down the years. It was to see him redeem himself against Barrera.
Hamed declined the offer, and, for any serious observers of the fight game wrote the concluding statement of a career which had always promised more than it had delivered.
So Warren's position is sound. However, it does cause a slight ripple of mirth in someone who was jeered out of a London television studio for making roughly the same point as the promoter, who was also on the panel and in rather sharp disagreement then. But one wouldn't want to be sniffy about something that happened six years ago, when, after all Warren was still Hamed's promoter.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments