Carlos Adames said he can beat anyone at middleweight and super middleweight, but the statement was met with immediate backlash from newly crowned IBF super middleweight champion Osleys Iglesias. After Adames announced he was ready to fight, the undefeated Cuban responded on social media, calling for the fight to go ahead.

The exchange began when Carlos Adames stated that no one at 160 or 168 pounds could beat him. The fan quickly challenged him to fight Iglesias, one of the most hazardous names in the super middleweight division.

Click here to sign up for our FREE newsletter

Related boxing news:

Last updated: 23/04/2026 at 10:29

While talking about failed drug tests in boxing, host Simon Jordan cited an earlier estimate by panelist Spencer Oliver, who suggested the number could be as high as 70 percent. Hamed immediately disputed this statement.

“That’s a tough statement,” Hamed told talksport Boxing when the number was repeated during the episode.

“The same applies to me personally. Don’t take it personally. It’s like destroying the players, 70% of them,” Hamed said.

It was vintage “Naz” stuff, seeing him come out waving to players like that. He has always been devoted to the craft and clearly sees the 70% result as a slap in the face to the guys who live neat and do grueling work.

Oliver responded that this was his opinion based on repeated failed tests and suspicions surrounding the sport, not evidence against specific names. Hamed was not convinced and said that charges should only be brought when the militant was actually caught.

“You can’t accuse any single person unless he or she has been caught,” Hamed said.

Hamed’s point about “destroying” warriors is the most compelling part of his argument. When someone like Spencer Oliver comes up with a huge number, like 70%, it creates a lasting cloud of suspicion.

This means that even if a player delivers a legendary, career-defining performance, the first thing some fans will do is look for a reason to discredit him. For a legend like Hamed, this is an insult to the discipline required in this sport.

Hamed is the guy who shows me the bills. By insisting that no one can be charged until they are caught, he seeks to maintain some level of due process. In his eyes, if you have failed the VADA or UKAD exam, you are a pure athlete. Period.

What’s captivating is that Hamed doesn’t take it lightly. While supporting strict accountability policies, he says people should not be labeled as fraudsters without evidence. If the test comes back positive, you own it, regardless of tainted meat or supplement excuses.

This is an truthful position. He wants to protect the reputation of good actors in sports while making sure the hammer continues to fall on anyone caught breaking the rules.

Nick Khan presented an alternative to Zuffa Boxing at the Muhammad Ali Bill hearing, outlining a clear plan to attract fighters through centralized commercial opportunities.

Khan spoke during ongoing discussions on potential reform of the Ali Law, explaining how Zuffa intends to operate in sports by offering a unified platform linked to broadcasting, sponsorship and revenue sharing.

The proposal states that Zuffa provides a direct alternative to the current boxing system used by sanctioning authorities, with a greater emphasis on long-term contracts and broader exposure.

Outline of the Zuffa model

Khan said fighters who join the organization will benefit from a broad platform, citing a distribution deal with Paramount and access to its global subscriber base, as well as network support from CBS.

“If you want a chance to be something bigger in less time on the platform, we were able to sign a deal with Paramount, as I said, for a platform that has almost 80 million subscribers worldwide and has a network partner in CBS,” Khan said during the hearing.

“If you want that exposure, if you want deals on trading cards, if you want deals on merchandise, if you want deals on video games where all the competitors will participate financially. If you want all of that and more, come this way. If not, that’s your choice.”

Khan also provided a critical perspective on the current state of the sport, stating that existing sanctioning body structures have negatively impacted the development of boxing.

“They are terrible for the sport. They have ruined the sport.”

An alternative approach

Khan’s comments were among the most detailed during the hearing, as Zuffa’s plan was presented as an option that could complement the existing system, rather than replace it entirely, in the wake of recent events that have already seen fighters walk away from world titles as tensions with sanctioning authorities rise.

However, his comments about sanctioning bodies also raised questions about how such an approach would be taken in the current setup, especially after the IBF clarified Richardson Hitchins’ title position following his move to Zuffa Boxing.

The discussion comes as renewed attention is drawn to the Ali Law, with lawmakers considering whether the changes could alter the balance between fighters, promoters and governing bodies.

A fighter perspective

The financial model outlined by Khan reflects militants’ concerns about how revenues should be distributed.

Sean O’Malley has previously made similar points, stating in Food Truck Diaries, “Reebok made over a million dollars on all my merchandise, and I got like $3,000.”

Nico Ali Walsh, Muhammad Ali’s grandson and an vigorous fighter, also said at the hearing that his grandfather’s name should be removed from the bill if it passes the Senate.

About the author

Phil Jay is the editor-in-chief of World Boxing News (WBN) and a boxing veteran with over 15 years of experience. Read the full biography.