J wrote:
and tread very carefull one assumes if Ian teaches English and is trianed journo he might have forgotten more about writing than you will ever know.
Well by the same logic, no writer who has never boxed should write on it / criticise boxing as he has never done it????
no, most folk can wrtie if they can be arsed but not everyone wants to or can box / get punched in the face for a living, as for being pompus, YOU ARE BEING EXTREMELY POMPOUS OVER THIS.
In short you are going out you way to be a prick on this issue, so im treating you like one.
well done mate, you've come across really well on this subject. no really.
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Hard to argue with that I think.
There is almost certainly more money for Ricky 'over there.' However, I guess there is always a risk in going with new promoters and fighting away from home.
In theory, with his showtime connections, there's no reason Warren cannot deliver big fights in America, my guess is that Hatton feels he has to overcome resistance on Warren's part, and his talks with other promoters may well be just to prove that if his wishes aren't met, he will go elsewhere.
I have a feeling Rick will resign with Warren.
Warren has already tried and failed at promoting in the US so really dont think that is a viable option. Warren of course is going to want Hatton to have as many of his fights as possible at the MEN as he makes far more money than he would simply having Hatton fighting on someone elses card in the US. Therein lies the problem, I really dont think the top boys at 140-147 are going to want to come over here and fight in Hatton's backyard, especially when you consider the common perception stateside is that he gets biased referees.
KO Atrist wrote:
But thats just it, he did match his no1 fighter with the worlds best.
Professional boxing is a business, mate. If Hattons wants glory above everything, he should have stayed amatuer and gone in the olympics.
Your attitude baffles me.
First of all, give me some credit for knowing how boxing works. Do you think I don't realise this is a money orientated business, like anything.
I am a boxing fan, and you are too. I however want to see the best matchups. AS A FAN. You want to see hatton get money fighting stiffs. I think I am in the majority with my view.
when american promoters have confidence in their fighter, match them with the world's best, and see them win, do they then look to rest on their laurels feeding the guy with soft touches? NO! Did you ever think jermain taylor WOULDN'T rematch Hopkins after he beat him the first time, as opposed to Warren refusing a return with Tzsyu irrespective of kostya's plans? What about Barrera, Morales, Mayweather? Did they think 'I've done enough' when they won their world titles and then just go into regression? NO! They furthered their career, doing would they could to maintain their status by fighting the best available.
FOR GOOD MONEY.
Again, I say that Hatton has the capacity for a megafight in America. They'd love him over there, he's THE champ at 140, and it'd be easy to fix a big fight that would make a mockery of Warren's cheques.
So tell me how it is financially better for Hatton to stay with Warren, I'm intrigued.
Easy, he will get better money, and better terms all round. He may also retain home advantage for some fights.
Hatton already earns more than most of the stars on Ians list, and that was BEFORE he became champion.
How many on Ians list earned as much as Hatton did up to and including the fight they became champion?
Hardly any if any at all.
But Hatton wants to leave a legacy aswell as swell his bank balance. He has made great money so far, but I think money becomes less of a priority at some stage and he wants titles and accolades. That seems to be the case now, if it was simply a money issue he would have continued with the status quo defending in Manchester. Hatton has always talked about fighting the best and I truly believe he wants to do so, whether Warren will let him off the leash enough to fulfil his ambitions remains to be seen but I am pretty sceptical.
Hatton wants a big fight in the States, he's said it a number of times over the years, and that might be the sticking point. SN no doubt want to keep him in the UK.
But at some point, with a tough fight looming, Ricky will probably want a defence at the MEN too - if there's a way out of his contract, maybe he become a free agent, a bit like Naz, and negotiate his promoters on a fight by fight basis.
MightyWarrior wrote:Hatton wants a big fight in the States, he's said it a number of times over the years, and that might be the sticking point. SN no doubt want to keep him in the UK.
But at some point, with a tough fight looming, Ricky will probably want a defence at the MEN too - if there's a way out of his contract, maybe he become a free agent, a bit like Naz, and negotiate his promoters on a fight by fight basis.
yip that would be the best deal for all, good thinking batman.
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Hard to argue with that I think.
There is almost certainly more money for Ricky 'over there.' However, I guess there is always a risk in going with new promoters and fighting away from home.
In theory, with his showtime connections, there's no reason Warren cannot deliver big fights in America, my guess is that Hatton feels he has to overcome resistance on Warren's part, and his talks with other promoters may well be just to prove that if his wishes aren't met, he will go elsewhere.
I have a feeling Rick will resign with Warren.
Warren has already tried and failed at promoting in the US so really dont think that is a viable option. Warren of course is going to want Hatton to have as many of his fights as possible at the MEN as he makes far more money than he would simply having Hatton fighting on someone elses card in the US. Therein lies the problem, I really dont think the top boys at 140-147 are going to want to come over here and fight in Hatton's backyard, especially when you consider the common perception stateside is that he gets biased referees.
Warren didn't really fail, he got absolutely shafted by Don King, not quite the same thing.
Ricky Hatton would EASILY top the bill on his own in the states, are you nuts? Corralles, and Mayweather WANT to fight him, they just don't want to go to Manchester to do it if they can avoid it, and rightly so.
I find it hard to believe that SN/Showtime couldn't put on Hatton v Corralles for instance.
knockout wrote:Following on from Ians great letter yesterday...
allegedly.tv posted the following quote last night
HATTON IN CONTRACT
by Iain Axon 2005-08-23 18:00:12 GMT
As far as Sports Network are concerned we have a binding agreement with Ricky Hatton, which we expect will be honoured and we look forward to continue our successful relationship together.
unless where it says 'We expect will be honoured' that implies an agreement not as 'set in stone' as frank would like.
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Hard to argue with that I think.
There is almost certainly more money for Ricky 'over there.' However, I guess there is always a risk in going with new promoters and fighting away from home.
In theory, with his showtime connections, there's no reason Warren cannot deliver big fights in America, my guess is that Hatton feels he has to overcome resistance on Warren's part, and his talks with other promoters may well be just to prove that if his wishes aren't met, he will go elsewhere.
I have a feeling Rick will resign with Warren.
Warren has already tried and failed at promoting in the US so really dont think that is a viable option. Warren of course is going to want Hatton to have as many of his fights as possible at the MEN as he makes far more money than he would simply having Hatton fighting on someone elses card in the US. Therein lies the problem, I really dont think the top boys at 140-147 are going to want to come over here and fight in Hatton's backyard, especially when you consider the common perception stateside is that he gets biased referees.
Warren didn't really fail, he got absolutely shafted by Don King, not quite the same thing.
Ricky Hatton would EASILY top the bill on his own in the states, are you nuts? Corralles, and Mayweather WANT to fight him, they just don't want to go to Manchester to do it if they can avoid it, and rightly so.
I find it hard to believe that SN/Showtime couldn't put on Hatton v Corralles for instance.
Yes he did get shafted by King but SN went on to do some standalone promoting in the US I believe which was less than stellar.
Its quite possible that SN/Showtime could promote Hatton bills in the US, but they'd surely have to team up with a stateside promoter to make that happen.
Whatever the outcome of all this lets hope Hatton gets it cleared up ASAP so he can get back in the ring and not lose the momentum gained in June.
nickd wrote:
Warren has already tried and failed at promoting in the US so really dont think that is a viable option. Warren of course is going to want Hatton to have as many of his fights as possible at the MEN as he makes far more money than he would simply having Hatton fighting on someone elses card in the US. Therein lies the problem, I really dont think the top boys at 140-147 are going to want to come over here and fight in Hatton's backyard, especially when you consider the common perception stateside is that he gets biased referees.
Warren didn't really fail, he got absolutely shafted by Don King, not quite the same thing.
Ricky Hatton would EASILY top the bill on his own in the states, are you nuts? Corralles, and Mayweather WANT to fight him, they just don't want to go to Manchester to do it if they can avoid it, and rightly so.
I find it hard to believe that SN/Showtime couldn't put on Hatton v Corralles for instance.
Yes he did get shafted by King but SN went on to do some standalone promoting in the US I believe which was less than stellar.
Its quite possible that SN/Showtime could promote Hatton bills in the US, but they'd surely have to team up with a stateside promoter to make that happen.
Whatever the outcome of all this lets hope Hatton gets it cleared up ASAP so he can get back in the ring and not lose the momentum gained in June.
Well seeing as SN have worked with Gary Shaw (who promoted Corralles), many times, I don't see that as a major hurdle. It's more a matter of Warren being willing to do so. Now obviously, that means two people dipping into the promotional pot, and less money for those concerned, but so long as Hatton gets what he wants he won't care.
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Right, and which 'serious publication' do you know of that has regular boxing columns?
You are a patronising prick, and I'd love to know what qualifies you as an expert on journalism, seeing as you can't even spell fornicating article.
Boxing journalism by and large is more melodramatic, especially in boxing publications. It's a matter of style. Having worked with Ian closely on producing magazine based material, I can say he is capable of producing more than one style.
Allright settle down people! Not able to handle a little constructive criticism.... and labelling me 'patronising' - well personally I find it patronising that boxing journalists write about boxers and tell them how to lead their lives / fight when they have not been in the ring...
(Not necessarilly referring to anyone here, but it would be interesting to know out of curiosity if yourself or Ian have ever boxed, and if so at what level etc...)
I'm as blind as a bat. There is no way I'm as brave/mental as Julian Jackson or Iran Barkley. Let me know if you need those references explaining. My boxing is limited to risking my contact lenses in (anti-) social circumstances, engaging simpletons who don't know when to leave things alone. Fortunately, these days, it's a very rare occurence.
"Not necessarily referring to anyone here"...and then goes on to specifically refer to us two by name.
And everyone here has heard your tiresome argument before. Where do you want me to start? All gynaecologists should be female? Or should I ring allegedly up and tell him he knows fornicate all about boxing because he was never a pro?
Move on.
Last edited by dondada on 24 Aug 2005, 07:30, edited 1 time in total.
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Warren didn't really fail, he got absolutely shafted by Don King, not quite the same thing.
Ricky Hatton would EASILY top the bill on his own in the states, are you nuts? Corralles, and Mayweather WANT to fight him, they just don't want to go to Manchester to do it if they can avoid it, and rightly so.
I find it hard to believe that SN/Showtime couldn't put on Hatton v Corralles for instance.
Yes he did get shafted by King but SN went on to do some standalone promoting in the US I believe which was less than stellar.
Its quite possible that SN/Showtime could promote Hatton bills in the US, but they'd surely have to team up with a stateside promoter to make that happen.
Whatever the outcome of all this lets hope Hatton gets it cleared up ASAP so he can get back in the ring and not lose the momentum gained in June.
Well seeing as SN have worked with Gary Shaw (who promoted Corralles), many times, I don't see that as a major hurdle. It's more a matter of Warren being willing to do so. Now obviously, that means two people dipping into the promotional pot, and less money for those concerned, but so long as Hatton gets what he wants he won't care.
As far as I was aware no fights have materialised from the Shaw connection. Apart from the flimsy Calzaghe v Lacy fight which might not happen yet....
Guys I have to say Ricky Hattons style is as repetitive as that of any top class boxer today. It's not attractive when compared with most of the stateside competition. He rarely floors anyone with a single shot, and his big win over Tszyu was an often messy affair.
We all love the lad because he's ours, but lets not overestimate what his popularity would be in the U.S. I don't see him as a big PPV name over there.
Kilburn wrote:I'll probably get shot down in flames here but...
Guys I have to say Ricky Hattons style is as repetitive as that of any top class boxer today. It's not attractive when compared with most of the stateside competition. He rarely floors anyone with a single shot, and his big win over Tszyu was an often messy affair.
We all love the lad because he's ours, but lets not overestimate what his popularity would be in the U.S. I don't see him as a big PPV name over there.
One good thing Ricky has got is he is very articulate and has an excellent sense of humour. He's done well, I believe, when he's been on US TV.
nickd wrote:the flimsy Calzaghe v Lacy fight which might not happen yet....
Not sounding as confident about the pull-out now Nick?
Fingers crossed it does all come together because it WOULD be a hell of a fight.
I hope it does go ahead, but I'm still confident it wont happen. Even in Warrens latest reply to Ian's article the old brittle hands get a nice mention.
There's just too many things stacked against that fight taking place in November.
steve689 wrote:Making shitloads of cash is fine but sooner or later though you want to test yourself against the best, retiring with millions in the bank but with a pitiful legacy can't be very satisfying can it? Or am i an old romantic
I find nothing pitiful about Hattons legacy.
He has made millions and has beaten the very best man in his division.
Most boxers fail to even reach journeyman status and retire penniless.
To refer to Hattons legacy as pitiful is very harsh.
Glory is great, but you speak to all the old champs who are skint, i bet all of them would rather have the money now, and fornicate the glory
I wasn't picking on hatton in particular it was more of a general comment, i just think that now he has made a decent amount of cash i think he should focus on cementing some sort of legacy. I believe that he needs to "crack America" in order to do this on a wider scale, his legacy is already there after beating Tszyu i agree but he needs to follow it up.
Your right of course that glory doesn't compensate lack of cash i totally agree, but in Hatton's case he has the money now (i would think) and is not in any great danger of being financially unsecure in the future.
In regards the criticism of McNeilly's open letter, i don't think it is pompous in respects to the writer expecting Hatton to personally read it and take it all on board but i think it is good to get the thoughts of the fans (and people who keep the game afloat). The letter raises issues we have and brings about good healthy debate and also a reply from Warren which can't be bad?
nickd wrote:the flimsy Calzaghe v Lacy fight which might not happen yet....
Not sounding as confident about the pull-out now Nick?
Fingers crossed it does all come together because it WOULD be a hell of a fight.
I hope it does go ahead, but I'm still confident it wont happen. Even in Warrens latest reply to Ian's article the old brittle hands get a nice mention.
There's just too many things stacked against that fight taking place in November.
Warren seemed somewhat ticked off with Calzaghe himself i thought by his reference to his "brittle hands", i actually don't hold the Calzaghe situation against FW i think it is Calzaghe's doing. Warren lost cash bringing over Glen Johnson.
Kilburn wrote:
Not sounding as confident about the pull-out now Nick?
Fingers crossed it does all come together because it WOULD be a hell of a fight.
I hope it does go ahead, but I'm still confident it wont happen. Even in Warrens latest reply to Ian's article the old brittle hands get a nice mention.
There's just too many things stacked against that fight taking place in November.
Warren seemed somewhat ticked off with Calzaghe himself i thought by his reference to his "brittle hands", i actually don't hold the Calzaghe situation against FW i think it is Calzaghe's doing. Warren lost cash bringing over Glen Johnson.
I totally agree, it was noticable a few months ago that Warren said something along the lines of "I've made the fight with Lacy, it's there for Joe, now the onus is on him to perform."
