BoxRec

I would also like to say that I still admire what he's achieved, despite my earlier posts. WBU, IBO, WBA, 2-time IBF light-welterweight champion & WBA welterweight champion - that's a pretty impressive tally for a down-to-earth chap from Manchester. He's always looked for the big names, and to go to the USA and take on Floyd Mayweather Jr & Manny Pacquaio (both considered P4P number 1) is fantastic in itself. He's made millions and good for him.

Boxingmad wrote:I would also like to say that I still admire what he's achieved, despite my earlier posts. WBU, IBO, WBA, 2-time IBF light-welterweight champion & WBA welterweight champion - that's a pretty impressive tally for a down-to-earth chap from Manchester. He's always looked for the big names, and to go to the USA and take on Floyd Mayweather Jr & Manny Pacquaio (both considered P4P number 1) is fantastic in itself. He's made millions and good for him.

I'll definitely second that.

PS: He also held the British light-welter title for a brief period by beating Jon Thaxton a man that Amir Khan will testify remains a high level operator to this day.

WayoftheCass wrote:

Boxingmad wrote:I would also like to say that I still admire what he's achieved, despite my earlier posts. WBU, IBO, WBA, 2-time IBF light-welterweight champion & WBA welterweight champion - that's a pretty impressive tally for a down-to-earth chap from Manchester. He's always looked for the big names, and to go to the USA and take on Floyd Mayweather Jr & Manny Pacquaio (both considered P4P number 1) is fantastic in itself. He's made millions and good for him.

I'll definitely second that.

PS: He also held the British light-welter title for a brief period by beating Jon Thaxton a man that Amir Khan will testify remains a high level operator to this day.

I was at that fight (Wembley Conference Centre) and it was a pretty decent scrap. Khan's opinion of Thaxton might explain why he avoided fighting him perhaps.

DG. wrote:

Carbo wrote:

Yes, but it's a truly idiotic one, on several levels -- in terms of historical and factual accuracy, in terms of boxing knowledge, and in terms of the logic upon which it is built.

Why?

Explain.

It is 100% accurate and you know it.

You come across as a psuedo-intellectual ( In ordinary terms....a Prick!)

Explain yourself.

Well, for a start, just a start, you're the only person I've heard of criticising Hatton for not facing Bradley. For how long has he been considered a top 140 lb-er? Since the Witter fight, basically, before which he was completely unknown. Since then, Hatton fought Malignaggi, who, for all his faults was at the time rated by most above Bradley and had certainly been at the top of the division for far longer, and Pacquaio, the pound for pound number one.

Yet you have a go for not fighting Bradley.

Ipso facto, as one pseudo intellectual might say, you are an idiot.