If Hatton wins against Urango will he vacate ???

Foggy · Post by **Foggy** » 20 Sep 2006, 08:04

So if Hatton beats Urango then Castillo looks like the next fight in mid 2007, but i've just noticed that N'Dou & Ben Rabah have an IBF elimination fight later this year, wonder if Hatton will have to fight either of these 2 before Castillo ???

vargas · Post by **vargas** » 20 Sep 2006, 10:23

I hope Ricky forgets about belts and just aims at facing the big names. The only fighters that seem to care about belts these days are the fringe challengers (like Witter) and the weight hoppers (like Mayweather).

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Sep 2006, 10:28

vargas wrote:I hope Ricky forgets about belts and just aims at facing the big names. The only fighters that seem to care about belts these days are the fringe challengers (like Witter) and the weight hoppers (like Mayweather).

Corley is a fringe challenger. Witter won maybe 10 rounds vs him, plus has wins over decent fighters Ndou and Kotelnik. IMO that puts him ahead of being a "fringe challenger"

Well well, Ricky may have to fight Rabah anyway. If all was as it should be, he'd be fighting Rabah next, as BR didn't really lose to Urango.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 20 Sep 2006, 11:58

Apparently HBO aren't bothered about the belts so there's no real reason for Ricky to try his best and hold on to them.

Fighters make the belt, not the other way round...

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:00

This is true Ian, however, Hatton probably wants to hold on the a belt for when it comes to negotiating with opponents who DO have one. It's a useful bargaining chip if nothing else.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:03

vargas wrote:I hope Ricky forgets about belts and just aims at facing the big names. The only fighters that seem to care about belts these days are the fringe challengers (like Witter) and the weight hoppers (like Mayweather).

Ricky must be a fringe contender too as he only goes for the weakest belt holders - Maussa, Collazo, Urango

And he should get a voluntary defense especially if its big like Castillo

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:04

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Apparently HBO aren't bothered about the belts so there's no real reason for Ricky to try his best and hold on to them.

Fighters make the belt, not the other way round...

Dont buy that - Hatton-Castillo title fight is bigger than a none title fight

Neri · Post by **Neri** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:11

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
vargas wrote:I hope Ricky forgets about belts and just aims at facing the big names. The only fighters that seem to care about belts these days are the fringe challengers (like Witter) and the weight hoppers (like Mayweather).
Ricky must be a fringe contender too as he only goes for the weakest belt holders - Maussa, Collazo, Urango

And he should get a voluntary defense especially if its big like Castillo

Tszyu ?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:12

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Apparently HBO aren't bothered about the belts so there's no real reason for Ricky to try his best and hold on to them.

Fighters make the belt, not the other way round...
Dont buy that - Hatton-Castillo title fight is bigger than a none title fight

HBO recognise the Ring Belt though.

Taki... · Post by **Taki...** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:14

Hatton would almost certainly be allowed a voluntary before taking on a mandatory. According to the IBF's own rules; after winning the title the champion has 9 months to defend against a mandatory as designated by the IBF and cannot enter into an optional defence which takes place less than 60 days prior to that. That would give Hatton plenty of time to get in an optional against Castillo before making any mandatory defence (although I can't see a fight against N'dou or Ben Rabah happening).

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:24

This is a slight digression, but is it just me who didn't notice this until I looked at boxrec's schedule this week, but Cotto is apparently fighting for Hatton's WBA (welter) belt in December, against Carlos Quintana.

I'm sure his move up was mentioned (he certainly seemed to be starting to struggle at 140) but I didn't realise it was this set in stone.

Mike Arnaoutis fights Torres for the vacant WBO 140 title.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:27

First I've heard of it, but not really been following the schedules like the anorak I used to be.

Neri · Post by **Neri** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:35

jomothepure wrote:This is a slight digression, but is it just me who didn't notice this until I looked at boxrec's schedule this week, but Cotto is apparently fighting for Hatton's WBA (welter) belt in December, against Carlos Quintana.

I'm sure his move up was mentioned (he certainly seemed to be starting to struggle at 140) but I didn't realise it was this set in stone.

Mike Arnaoutis fights Torres for the vacant WBO 140 title.

I thought Cotto's next bout would be at catchweight ? I'm not sure Cotto-Quintana can happen for the WBA welterweight title because Oktay Urkal is demanding his shot isn't he?

Urkal-Quintana probably.

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:47

jomothepure wrote:This is a slight digression, but is it just me who didn't notice this until I looked at boxrec's schedule this week, but Cotto is apparently fighting for Hatton's WBA (welter) belt in December, against Carlos Quintana.

I'm sure his move up was mentioned (he certainly seemed to be starting to struggle at 140) but I didn't realise it was this set in stone.

Mike Arnaoutis fights Torres for the vacant WBO 140 title.

I'm surprised it has gone uncommented until now. Hatton vacates and moves back down to LWW and Cotto moves up to WW and gets an immediate crack at Hatton's now vacant title. And they do it almost at the same time. I dont believe in conspiracy theories but there's something awry about this. Is one of them or both of them trying to avoid the other?

Maybe Hatton thought after his last performance fvck this, I'm not fighting a naturally bigger man at a weight he is going to feel more comfortable at. Or maybe Cotto waited for Hatton to vacate and thought here's my chance to grab a belt at WW.

Both camps must have had an idea about the other's intentions.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Sep 2006, 12:56

Not neccesarily, why would either camp know what the other was doing?

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:18

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Not neccesarily, why would either camp know what the other was doing?

I am not saying that they knew for certain. I am saying they would have had an inkling about what the other was possibly going to do. Afterall they work within the same political boxing arena.

When Hatton's camp was in the U.S. for his last couple of fights they must have spoken Cotto's camp, among others, with a view to a possible fight. In those talks, I am guessing that the question of weight, and of course purses, may have been discussed. It doesn't take rocket scientist to work out that Cotto was going to move up to WW at some stage.

The timing of their simultaneous weight movements, seems to me a little suspicious to say the least.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:35

Neri1983 wrote:
jomothepure wrote:This is a slight digression, but is it just me who didn't notice this until I looked at boxrec's schedule this week, but Cotto is apparently fighting for Hatton's WBA (welter) belt in December, against Carlos Quintana.

I'm sure his move up was mentioned (he certainly seemed to be starting to struggle at 140) but I didn't realise it was this set in stone.

Mike Arnaoutis fights Torres for the vacant WBO 140 title.
I thought Cotto's next bout would be at catchweight ? I'm not sure Cotto-Quintana can happen for the WBA welterweight title because Oktay Urkal is demanding his shot isn't he?

Urkal-Quintana probably.

I read somewhere last week Urkal has agreed to step aside to allow Cotto and Quintana to fight for the title.

Taki... · Post by **Taki...** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:38

I think Hatton's move back down is purely down to him getting a fight with Castillo at 140. With Mayweather tied up for 2 fights, Baldomir likely to lose and Margarito seemingly on no-ones wish list, Castillo is the biggest fight out there for Hatton at either weight.
I also doubt anyone but Urkal will be getting a shot at the vacant WBA welterweight title, and it's highly doubtful that his opponent would be Cotto in his debut at the weight.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:38

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:Apparently HBO aren't bothered about the belts so there's no real reason for Ricky to try his best and hold on to them.

Fighters make the belt, not the other way round...
Dont buy that - Hatton-Castillo title fight is bigger than a none title fight
HBO recognise the Ring Belt though.

You cant carry it into the ring

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:40

Neri1983 wrote:
jomothepure wrote:This is a slight digression, but is it just me who didn't notice this until I looked at boxrec's schedule this week, but Cotto is apparently fighting for Hatton's WBA (welter) belt in December, against Carlos Quintana.

I'm sure his move up was mentioned (he certainly seemed to be starting to struggle at 140) but I didn't realise it was this set in stone.

Mike Arnaoutis fights Torres for the vacant WBO 140 title.
I thought Cotto's next bout would be at catchweight ? I'm not sure Cotto-Quintana can happen for the WBA welterweight title because Oktay Urkal is demanding his shot isn't he?

Urkal-Quintana probably.

Ukrals been paid step aside money with a shot at the winner

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:42

SticknMove wrote:
jomothepure wrote:This is a slight digression, but is it just me who didn't notice this until I looked at boxrec's schedule this week, but Cotto is apparently fighting for Hatton's WBA (welter) belt in December, against Carlos Quintana.

I'm sure his move up was mentioned (he certainly seemed to be starting to struggle at 140) but I didn't realise it was this set in stone.

Mike Arnaoutis fights Torres for the vacant WBO 140 title.
I'm surprised it has gone uncommented until now. Hatton vacates and moves back down to LWW and Cotto moves up to WW and gets an immediate crack at Hatton's now vacant title. And they do it almost at the same time. I dont believe in conspiracy theories but there's something awry about this. Is one of them or both of them trying to avoid the other?

Maybe Hatton thought after his last performance fvck this, I'm not fighting a naturally bigger man at a weight he is going to feel more comfortable at. Or maybe Cotto waited for Hatton to vacate and thought here's my chance to grab a belt at WW.

Both camps must have had an idea about the other's intentions.

Good theory except Cotto-Quintana is a 50-50 fight

Taki... · Post by **Taki...** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:52

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Neri1983 wrote:
jomothepure wrote:This is a slight digression, but is it just me who didn't notice this until I looked at boxrec's schedule this week, but Cotto is apparently fighting for Hatton's WBA (welter) belt in December, against Carlos Quintana.

I'm sure his move up was mentioned (he certainly seemed to be starting to struggle at 140) but I didn't realise it was this set in stone.

Mike Arnaoutis fights Torres for the vacant WBO 140 title.
I thought Cotto's next bout would be at catchweight ? I'm not sure Cotto-Quintana can happen for the WBA welterweight title because Oktay Urkal is demanding his shot isn't he?

Urkal-Quintana probably.
Ukrals been paid step aside money with a shot at the winner

Perfect example (if true) of how pointless the ABC's rules are. Surely by taking 'step aside money' Urkal would be declaring himself unavailable and as such ranked fighters like Collazo, Klose and Julio should be given their shot. Cotto was not a WBA titlist at 140 and as such should not be given preferential treatment by the WBA for their vacant welterweight title.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 20 Sep 2006, 13:54

Urkal is clearly not confident about winning the belt, thats the second step aside money he's accepted now! Surely the WBA should give him the boot as the mandatory if he doesn't want it.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 20 Sep 2006, 15:47

I'm calling it now bitches. Urango beats Hatton in upset of the year.

Neri · Post by **Neri** » 20 Sep 2006, 15:50

nickd wrote:Urkal is clearly not confident about winning the belt, thats the second step aside money he's accepted now! Surely the WBA should give him the boot as the mandatory if he doesn't want it.

Bloody hell. Making quite a nice living for himself accepting all these pay offs.