Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Robnorton
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 43
Joined: 25 Apr 2010, 17:33

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by Robnorton »

MightyWarrior wrote:
Kilburn wrote:
MightyWarrior wrote:Can't remember which fight it was, but recall Saul getting caught and hurt in one of his break through fights, and the way he negotiated that and came back to win was very impressive.
I think that was the JM Cotto fight, Alvarez did recover very quickly.

I also recall a comical hard right hand from Carlos Baldomir which seemed to spin his head around 180 degrees. Didn't phase him.
Yep think you're right :TU:
Well we will know how good he is if Matthew can take him to the later rounds and test his stamina. Thats when we will know if the weight issue has had an effect on him. Unfortunately I don't think Matt packs the sort of punch to trouble Canelo, or perhaps its the body shots that he should be concentrating on 'cos he seems to have a strong jawline.
dbflex
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 870
Joined: 08 Nov 2007, 12:53

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by dbflex »

Robnorton wrote:
MightyWarrior wrote:
Kilburn wrote: I think that was the JM Cotto fight, Alvarez did recover very quickly.

I also recall a comical hard right hand from Carlos Baldomir which seemed to spin his head around 180 degrees. Didn't phase him.
Yep think you're right :TU:
Well we will know how good he is if Matthew can take him to the later rounds and test his stamina. Thats when we will know if the weight issue has had an effect on him. Unfortunately I don't think Matt packs the sort of punch to trouble Canelo, or perhaps its the body shots that he should be concentrating on 'cos he seems to have a strong jawline.
Good shout. A potentially weight-weakened opponent with a decent chin and Matt is a good body-puncher.
Deserter
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6441
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 10:01

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by Deserter »

Scottrf wrote:
Deserter wrote:Extrapolating out to an implausible extremity doesn't add validity to your case. We'll just have to agree to disagree, but judged in the context of the weight he had to make (and has made) and the amount of 'cutting' that entails, I'm in absolutely no doubt that he could have made it irrespective of his 'organic growth'.
Of course it does, because my argument was that he may not be a fully grown adult. What is also important is what weight he has put on; is it fat or muscle, has his frame grown? He's hardly going to be able to lose muscle to lose a few pounds.
No it doesn't, because even accepting that context he could have still cut food/dehydrated to make that weight. Do I think that would have been a sensible strategy? Unlikely. Do I think it was was impossible to achieve? Absolutely not.
Deserter
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6441
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 10:01

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by Deserter »

Jon Saxon wrote:Well I'm not with any of you and I know what I'm talking about because i used to own a gym that was used mostly by body builders and I also used to go to my own boxing gym every week, so I can tell you this...

Sure anyone can make the weight.
But that is my sole point - he could have made the weight.
Achybreaky
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 443
Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:54

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by Achybreaky »

Hello chaps..long time no post, any streams knocking around for this fight later?

Have a sizable bet running on this fight after sykes won on points this evening.

For what its worth i think that alvarez will have this done before the sixth round.
Scottrf
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1146
Joined: 30 Nov 2010, 05:43

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by Scottrf »

Deserter wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Deserter wrote:Extrapolating out to an implausible extremity doesn't add validity to your case. We'll just have to agree to disagree, but judged in the context of the weight he had to make (and has made) and the amount of 'cutting' that entails, I'm in absolutely no doubt that he could have made it irrespective of his 'organic growth'.
Of course it does, because my argument was that he may not be a fully grown adult. What is also important is what weight he has put on; is it fat or muscle, has his frame grown? He's hardly going to be able to lose muscle to lose a few pounds.
No it doesn't, because even accepting that context he could have still cut food/dehydrated to make that weight. Do I think that would have been a sensible strategy? Unlikely. Do I think it was was impossible to achieve? Absolutely not.
My. Lord. Lets say a year ago he was 150 pounds bones/muscle and 10 pounds fluids, 160 total. He could cut to 150. If he puts on 5 pounds of bone and muscle from natural growth he'd be 155 pounds bone/muscle and 10 pounds fluid, 165 to start but could no longer cut to 150. He's not lazy because he can no longer make the same weight. Not everyone is the same, and his frame may still be evolving over time. To say he could starve himself and lose all his mass would be a completely pointless statement, the argument only has relevance in terms of a boxer losing fluid to reduce their weight. To make it easier: If he puts on weight in other areas there wont be any more fluid/fat for him to cut.

You're arguing a strategy you know is pointless to defend an indefensible position. My statement was that it's possible for him to not be able to make the same weight he once could, for a reason other than laziness. That's a fact whatever spin/weightlifting argument you want to use to argue against it. He could have misjudged it or never had any intention of getting down. But there comes a point where there is no more to cut and what you weight X years ago has no relevance.
Deserter
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6441
Joined: 04 Sep 2003, 10:01

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by Deserter »

Scottrf wrote:My statement was that it's possible for him to not be able to make the same weight he once could, for a reason other than laziness. That's a fact whatever spin/weightlifting argument you want to use to argue against it. He could have misjudged it or never had any intention of getting down. But there comes a point where there is no more to cut and what you weight X years ago has no relevance.
Of course he could still make it - what you're saying is that there comes a point where it's detrimental for a boxer to do so and I'm not arguing with that in principle.
However, in the specific case of Alvarez, based on what I've seen of him I find it extremely unlikely that this was the case given his apparent conditioning.
McCannW14
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 501
Joined: 05 Dec 2007, 17:57

Re: Hatton v Alvarez almost called off

Post by McCannW14 »

bynino wrote:I don't think he was even going to make 150. So he is not weight drained at all. It took him 2 hours to lose 8oz. Doesnt sound like someone really busting a gut does it

Alvarez did look good, but what top ten genuine world class fighter wouldnt when you have Matthew Hatton in front of them.

Alvarez is decent and bangs a bit, but he aint no reincarnation of Tony Ayala Jnr. Not in a million years.
Post Reply