Hatton v Castillo publicity

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Mar 2007, 11:15

Castillo was in England last week to help hype the Hatton fight. So where is all the publicity? Very few articles, no quotes apart from the "we'll knock ten bells out of each uvver"...Is this all for the HBO preview/build up on the day of the fight?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Mar 2007, 11:33

for gods sake, the fight is in bloody june, very few fights get THAT much in the way of advance publicity.

Oscar and Floyd's promotional tour only kicked into gear recently, and their fight is almost a full two months earlier!

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Mar 2007, 11:43

Yeah but this is Hatton's second elite opponent! I saw nothing in the papers.

I forgot to look on BBN -

kevo · Post by **kevo** » 01 Mar 2007, 13:14

Castillo's a Mau U fan? Makes sense, with him living in Mexico.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 01 Mar 2007, 13:30

They both look relatively in shape. Neither has a puffy bloated face on the photos. Castillo's face is all bones - bulging cheekbones and massive chin - and Hatton still has some shape to his face.

Rocky Balboa · Post by **Rocky Balboa** » 01 Mar 2007, 14:59

viciousmaussa wrote:They both look relatively in shape. Neither has a puffy bloated face on the photos. Castillo's face is all bones - bulging cheekbones and massive chin - and Hatton still has some shape to his face.

This may be so, but Ricky went on his annual family cruise last friday, so there's still time for him & Castillo to get out of shape. Personally, think both Hatton & Castillo will be more out of shape than what they appeared before they commence training for June.

Think Hatton needs to be careful, if you ask me. He cannot afford to let himself go, turning up for camp in the bad shape he was when training started for Urango. I read he was around 12st 10lbs when camp started?

IMO, Hatton has to be on the ball for Castillo. People may be unimpressed by JLC last fight, & yes, it was below par, but he'll be motivated for Ricky.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 01 Mar 2007, 21:24

IBO Belt!

Not buying this If the IBO's on the line.

states · Post by **states** » 01 Mar 2007, 21:57

Eh? Would you buy it if the IBF had allowed Hatton to fight Castillo rather than N'Dou? Hatton has, rather shamefully, allowed his last three fights to happen because of belts, not opponents. Now he's fighting a worthy opponent, are you saying it doesn't matter because there's not one of the 'big 3' (the biggest joke in boxing) belts on the line?

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 01 Mar 2007, 22:01

states wrote:Eh? Would you buy it if the IBF had allowed Hatton to fight Castillo rather than N'Dou? Hatton has, rather shamefully, allowed his last three fights to happen because of belts, not opponents. Now he's fighting a worthy opponent, are you saying it doesn't matter because there's not one of the 'big 3' (the biggest joke in boxing) belts on the line?

I'm not buying It because Sky have thrown their principles out of the window just for their cash cow.

Thought they wern't showing IBO fights and most Brit fighters gave theirs up so they could still have Sky Coverage.

I only bought Urango because they put Witter on the PPV to bulk It up. I was nearly going to wait for an Internet download elsewhere otherwise.

I like Hatton, I support any Brit fighter that goes on to World Class but I'm not buying It because of Sky. If Hatton gives up the IBO then I might.

Hatton shouldn't of wasted his time fighting for the IBF giving the belt up In less than two weeks but It's a better belt than the IBO.

states · Post by **states** » 01 Mar 2007, 22:15

I agree that Hatton fighting for the IBF belt, only to give it up a week later was a pointless exercise. But surely Hatton versus Castillo for the IBO belt is slightly different from Takaloo versus Wayne Alexander for the WBU?

The IBO belt isn't even going to be mentioned in the Hatton-Castillo build-up, as opposed to the SKY days of 'World Championship Boxing' when it was a local hero fighting an anonymous Eastern European. Are you boycotting ITV's coverage for the rest of the year? Plenty of bogus title fights on their shows. Hatton-Castillo is a proper fight. The IBO belt may not have the prestige of the WBC/WBA or IBF, but it's more relevant, in this case, than most of the fights those charlatans will sanction this year. Their rankings are actually independent, and they actually recognise guys who are at the top of the division every now and again, unlike, say, the WBU.

Plus, how is the IBF a 'better' belt, than the IBO when Hatton won both of them in the same fight, yet the IBF were insisting on the fight none of us wanted to see?

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 02 Mar 2007, 05:37

Max Molyneux wrote:IBO Belt!

Not buying this If the IBO's on the line.

Hobson's comments are inexplicable. "That's why we made it (the Urango fight) for the IBO also", in case the IBF stripped them.

Having the Ring and Lineal and World and World Lineal etc etc titles should be enough. I can't see why they have to use a naff unrecognized sanctioning body, when they can say it's for the "People's Championship" or "to settle the best 140-lb er in the world" (debatable, ie Witter).

At the end of the day I suppose it's about who you can fool!

fried bread · Post by **fried bread** » 02 Mar 2007, 05:45

Don't see what the problem is with the N'dou fight. Sure the IBF - if they weren't abnormal - would've given Hatton an extension.

I just watched N'dou-Mitchell for the 1st time. A sharp, fast Sharmbah Mitchell. I had N'dou 2 or 3 points clear at the end. N'dou was fast, lively, fought well from orthodox AND southpaw (timing Mitchell with lead rights and left hooks, outjabbing Mitchell from southpaw on occasion).

It was one hell of a fight, with Sharmbah making some terrific rallies!

N'dou has also just stopped Ben Rabah, who is a very awkward foe. This is also meant to be up there with Earl-Katsidis as an early frontrunner for 2007 fight of the year. N'dou can contribute a lot to making 140 an exciting division. He will cane Arturo Gatti.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 02 Mar 2007, 11:45

states wrote:I agree that Hatton fighting for the IBF belt, only to give it up a week later was a pointless exercise. But surely Hatton versus Castillo for the IBO belt is slightly different from Takaloo versus Wayne Alexander for the WBU?

The IBO belt isn't even going to be mentioned in the Hatton-Castillo build-up, as opposed to the SKY days of 'World Championship Boxing' when it was a local hero fighting an anonymous Eastern European. Are you boycotting ITV's coverage for the rest of the year? Plenty of bogus title fights on their shows. Hatton-Castillo is a proper fight. The IBO belt may not have the prestige of the WBC/WBA or IBF, but it's more relevant, in this case, than most of the fights those charlatans will sanction this year. Their rankings are actually independent, and they actually recognise guys who are at the top of the division every now and again, unlike, say, the WBU.

Plus, how is the IBF a 'better' belt, than the IBO when Hatton won both of them in the same fight, yet the IBF were insisting on the fight none of us wanted to see?

Doesn't matter who the fighter Is Sky are supposed to be refusing to show non big 4 titles. Floyd had the IBO defending but he at least had the WBC and IBF In his Sky fights.

ITV are not showing these fights on PPV but for free and have not gone on record saying they refuse to show bogus title fights like Sky.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 02 Mar 2007, 11:46

viciousmaussa wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:IBO Belt!

Not buying this If the IBO's on the line.
Hobson's comments are inexplicable. "That's why we made it (the Urango fight) for the IBO also", in case the IBF stripped them.

Having the Ring and Lineal and World and World Lineal etc etc titles should be enough. I can't see why they have to use a naff unrecognized sanctioning body, when they can say it's for the "People's Championship" or "to settle the best 140-lb er in the world" (debatable, ie Witter).

At the end of the day I suppose it's about who you can fool!

If the IBO was given up too, I wouldn't mind buying the PPV.

I treat the Ring Belt the same as the big 3 to be honest. They seem to give the belts to fighters HBO likes sometimes.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 02 Mar 2007, 12:16

In all, Hatton is the man right now for beating Tszyu. However, let's say he beats Castillo & Witter beats Harris. Witter is clearly the #2 in the division and Hatton should get penalised if he won't fight the #2. It tarnishes the division and allows opinion to splinter, does this kind of evasion.

Kind of like Cazaghe with Kessler.

SticknMove · Post by **SticknMove** » 02 Mar 2007, 14:00

viciousmaussa wrote:In all, Hatton is the man right now for beating Tszyu. However, let's say he beats Castillo & Witter beats Harris. Witter is clearly the #2 in the division and Hatton should get penalised if he won't fight the #2. It tarnishes the division and allows opinion to splinter, does this kind of evasion.

Kind of like Cazaghe with Kessler.

Agreed.

It penalises Hatton's legacy if that scenario sets up Hatton and Witter and the fight doesn't happen. Fvck big money high profile fights, just clear up the division and take it from there.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 02 Mar 2007, 14:03

SticknMove wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote:In all, Hatton is the man right now for beating Tszyu. However, let's say he beats Castillo & Witter beats Harris. Witter is clearly the #2 in the division and Hatton should get penalised if he won't fight the #2. It tarnishes the division and allows opinion to splinter, does this kind of evasion.

Kind of like Cazaghe with Kessler.
Agreed.

It penalises Hatton's legacy if that scenario sets up Hatton and Witter and the fight doesn't happen. Fvck big money high profile fights, just clear up the division and take it from there.

The only fight bigger and therefore excusable than the Harris/Witter winner would be Mayweather/Cotto. I see a Castillo2 fight or Corrales fight happening though.

Lennox · Post by **Lennox** » 03 Mar 2007, 10:14

Max Molyneux wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:IBO Belt!

Not buying this If the IBO's on the line.
Hobson's comments are inexplicable. "That's why we made it (the Urango fight) for the IBO also", in case the IBF stripped them.

Having the Ring and Lineal and World and World Lineal etc etc titles should be enough. I can't see why they have to use a naff unrecognized sanctioning body, when they can say it's for the "People's Championship" or "to settle the best 140-lb er in the world" (debatable, ie Witter).

At the end of the day I suppose it's about who you can fool!
If the IBO was given up too, I wouldn't mind buying the PPV.

I treat the Ring Belt the same as the big 3 to be honest. They seem to give the belts to fighters HBO likes sometimes.

Why so anti the IBO Max? IMO they are the best organisation and are the ones trying to be the fairest of all the sanctioning bodies. Values of belts are almost meaningless, its the quality of the fight.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 03 Mar 2007, 20:49

Lennox wrote:
Max Molyneux wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote:Hobson's comments are inexplicable. "That's why we made it (the Urango fight) for the IBO also", in case the IBF stripped them.

Having the Ring and Lineal and World and World Lineal etc etc titles should be enough. I can't see why they have to use a naff unrecognized sanctioning body, when they can say it's for the "People's Championship" or "to settle the best 140-lb er in the world" (debatable, ie Witter).

At the end of the day I suppose it's about who you can fool!
If the IBO was given up too, I wouldn't mind buying the PPV.

I treat the Ring Belt the same as the big 3 to be honest. They seem to give the belts to fighters HBO likes sometimes.
Why so anti the IBO Max? IMO they are the best organisation and are the ones trying to be the fairest of all the sanctioning bodies. Values of belts are almost meaningless, its the quality of the fight.

It's more Sky Principles than the IBO.

states · Post by **states** » 03 Mar 2007, 20:55

I just don't understand why you're pissed off about this. Breaking their 'no minor title fights' rule for Hatton-Castillo doesn't seem like something to complain about to me. If it was Hatton against, say, Demetrius Hopkins for the IBO belt, I could understand. But this is a proper fight, and the trinket on the line is secondary to that. Would you refuse to watch if it was Hatton-Witter for the IBO belt?

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 03 Mar 2007, 21:06

states wrote:I just don't understand why you're pissed off about this. Breaking their 'no minor title fights' rule for Hatton-Castillo doesn't seem like something to complain about to me. If it was Hatton against, say, Demetrius Hopkins for the IBO belt, I could understand. But this is a proper fight, and the trinket on the line is secondary to that. Would you refuse to watch if it was Hatton-Witter for the IBO belt?

Not so pissed off, fighting Castillo Is good.

Just that Sky are throwing their so called no minor title rules out of the window for Hatton but wouldn't do It for the other fighters who appear on Sky.

Don't care If Hatton's a world class fighter, the favouritism Is unfair, especially as other fighters had to give up their IBO or other minor titles so they could appear on Sky otherwise they get no TV coverage.

I'll watch It just no not on Sky PPV.

I'd not get Hatton and Witter on PPV for just a minor belt, but Witter has a proper title to sell If he gets past Harris would he should.

states · Post by **states** » 04 Mar 2007, 00:05

But did SKY bin the IBO/WBF etc titles because of the belts themselves, or because of the fights that were being made for those titles? I don't think they're going back on their principles by showing Hatton-Castillo. Their policy was no more ridiculous mismatches with the window dressing of a 'world title' belt. Hatton versus Castillo is no mismatch.

I can understand your argument here, I just think you're missing the point.

Lennox · Post by **Lennox** » 04 Mar 2007, 05:45

IBO are actually not banned by SKY, they have shown a number of IBO fights, a year or so ago they moved to a policy of covering more British & Commonwealth fights, so the reason you see less IBO fights is because they pay the promoters less for the nights package and the promoter cant afford the purses. The problem is that there are not many GB fighters that are good enough to compete for the IBO title anymore.

Sky not working with the IBO is a bad move in my opinion, fighters from GB are not learning and fighting against good opponents is what it should be about to educate the boxers and give the paying public a good show. IBO fights are pretty much always good, the opponent has to be ranked quite high, their quality control was second only to the WBC during 2006, some of the WBO and WBA stuff is pretty dire. I think its a shame more boxing fans dont mbrace the IBO more they are doing all the things to improve a lot of your moans. Some of the stuff SKY put on is pretty rank.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 04 Mar 2007, 06:15

truth is no one wants another title

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 04 Mar 2007, 06:32

states wrote:But did SKY bin the IBO/WBF etc titles because of the belts themselves, or because of the fights that were being made for those titles? I don't think they're going back on their principles by showing Hatton-Castillo. Their policy was no more ridiculous mismatches with the window dressing of a 'world title' belt. Hatton versus Castillo is no mismatch.

I can understand your argument here, I just think you're missing the point.

I'm not missing anything, It's your choice that you want to get the fight and Ignore the belt because the oppositions good.

I just don't want to Ignore the fact the IBO Is on the line and play favourites because It's Hatton Vs Castillo, while lesser name fighters are told by sky to give the belt up If their UK fighters, just so they can have coverage while Hatton has It nice and cushy.

I'll just find It on Youtube or somewhere like that.