BoxRec

don't call it a comeback wrote:

boxingchat wrote:Today's Hatton gossip. The WBA have been told by a NY court that they are still not, despite Hatton vacating his 140 lb belt, in a position to sanction any title for Hatton as it will be seen as 'collusion' to avoid his obligation to M'Baye. Damages for M'Baye will be awarded and the WBA will not be too happy to help Hatton as a result of the cost.

The measly $300 (£160) has still not arrived and now SKY are rumoured to have pulled the PPV and are now going free-to-air.

Kings coming over to put some spin on the situation to the gullable British press and say that belts don't matter and that this is a REAL world title fight blah blah blah. However, belts do matter and he will be still proclaiming Collazo as the World champion after Hatton flattens him in Boston and selling his next fight as a WBA defence

The Judah/Baldomir fiasco has opened another loophole to be exploited where Champions can fight, lose and still hold onto their belts by the Promoter not paying the fees. King will use this loophole more and more to protect his bargaining power.

So, at the time of speaking Ricky Hatton has vacated three belts, is going into a non-title fight, against a King fighter and really believes that this will put him in position to fight Mayweather.

Ricky said recently "If Junior Witter wins a top-three belt then I will fight him as he has something to offer. Without one I don't need him." Perhap's Maywether will return the comment and leave more egg on the Hatton's faces!

Does anyone wonder why, for the first time in 35 years, King didn't ask for options on Hatton before putting HIS champion in against a voluntary challenger. He doesn't think Collazo will win so did King know the truth way back then? Of course he did.

The German's are still not agreeing to step aside and no monetary offer has been made for him to do so. Sauerland and King don't get on and they won't be bought out so all in the Hatton garden is not looking rosy.

Is Ricky still earning that massive purse with no PPV?

Way to go, Fight Academy................................[/b]

There are several things about this post I don't quite understand. Be grateful for enlightenment.

1. You say damages to Mbaye will be awarded. For what? For sanctioning the Collazo fight as a WBA title fight? But later on you claim that this won't be a WBA title fight anyway. Which is it?

2. You say that the Judah/Baldomir fiasco has created a loophole whereby promoters dont pay sanctioning fees and their fighter hangs onto the belt. But surely the Baldomir situation is down to the fighter himself not paying the sanctioning fees?

3. Is your argument really that the Mayweather/Hatton fight depends on Hatton holding a world title at 147? Because I dont find that credible. Arguably not holding the WBA title could strengthen Hatton's hand because it will allow him to be ranked by the IBF at 147 and pressure Mayweather that way. But to be honest, we all know that the key factor in Mayweather/Hatton will be money. There are too many examples of two top 10 p4p fighters meeting with no belt at stake in recent years for me to buy this argument of yours if that is what you are claiming.

4. Finally, you make great play of the fact that King has not got options on Hatton. As if this proves all your theories. But you know, i know, King knows, the whole world knows that he would never have got options on Hatton. Hatton is one of the hottest properties in world boxing right now - if King thought he could get options on Hatton he would crawl on his arse through broken glass to get a sniff of them. As would all promoters. Including Sports Network.

1. M'Baye has lost out finacially because the WBA allowed him to be stepped over for Hatton V Maussa to happen and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished. He will be compensated due to the WBA's actions. If the WBA sanction Hatton's move up to 147 lbs then they will be allowing him to escape his obligation at 140 lbs and thus colluding with Hatton to damge M'bayes erning potential.


2. You are correct, but if a fighter is told not to pay the santion fee or his Promoter does not pay it to protect him, as per Baldomir, then he will hold his position by default as it was not a sanctioned defence. For Collazo this is a great insurance policy.

3. See your point and you may be right. It's my hunch that Mayweather being a free agent and a real difficult bastard to deal with will not want Hatton for no gain. He can make big money without Hatton, a danger man granted. Mayweather will prioce himselaf out of it now he has no promoter to do his business. The fact he paid Arum just $750k to buy his contract out suggests Arum was tired of him otherwise why so cheap? We both may turn out to be right, wait and see!

4. Hatton is not tyhe hottest commodity in boxing and that attitude is the reasons for his current problems. He has dissappeared off the radar since he beat Tszyu and his nteam are becoming a laughing stock among US factions. King wouldn't do business for no options that is my point, if he couldn't get them he would not deal. He did have options on Baldomir but sold them after the fight when Judah got to keep his belt and he signed for Mayweather. KIng did'nt ask or want oiptions on Mayweather as he knew it would be for no title. King's lawyer is Judd Bernstein who is coincidentally representing M'baye so he knows the legal score and has done from day one. As for all Promoters "Crawling through Broken Glass for Hatton" you are deluded on that one. He and Pop went to Arum, King, Hearn, Shaw, Main Events, The Duvas and even the old 'Walrus', Cedric Kushner and all declined his ridiculoius business plan so he goes to the second tier and find three ego-maniacs who were happy for the ride, enter Hobson, Waterman and Pellullo. He tried Showtime, BBC and ITV beofre settling at HBO and staying with Sky for a few quid despite tyhe lure of terrestrial TV. Be honest, what a sterling job they have now done between them!

It's a sad state of affairs and this shambolic event may be the wake up call Ricky needs before it is too late.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

boxingchat wrote: Does anyone wonder why, for the first time in 35 years, King didn't ask for options on Hatton before putting HIS champion in against a voluntary challenger. He doesn't think Collazo will win so did King know the truth way back then? Of course he did.
[/b]

I raised this point myself, and was staggered to learn that King had no options. However, it isn't the only time in 35 years, King didn't ask for options on Baldomir I believe.

Quite right. Its not the first time or the second time in 35 years. King has not had options on many fights during this period. And this includes occasions when he proposed fights on the basis that he did not ask for options. Boxingchat has got this one at least wrong.

don't call it a comeback wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

boxingchat wrote: Does anyone wonder why, for the first time in 35 years, King didn't ask for options on Hatton before putting HIS champion in against a voluntary challenger. He doesn't think Collazo will win so did King know the truth way back then? Of course he did.
[/b]

I raised this point myself, and was staggered to learn that King had no options. However, it isn't the only time in 35 years, King didn't ask for options on Baldomir I believe.

Quite right. Its not the first time or the second time in 35 years. King has not had options on many fights during this period. And this includes occasions when he proposed fights on the basis that he did not ask for options. Boxingchat has got this one at least wrong.

no he hasn't. and i see you didn't respond to his excellent post.

boxingchat wrote:

don't call it a comeback wrote:

boxingchat wrote:Today's Hatton gossip. The WBA have been told by a NY court that they are still not, despite Hatton vacating his 140 lb belt, in a position to sanction any title for Hatton as it will be seen as 'collusion' to avoid his obligation to M'Baye. Damages for M'Baye will be awarded and the WBA will not be too happy to help Hatton as a result of the cost.

The measly $300 (£160) has still not arrived and now SKY are rumoured to have pulled the PPV and are now going free-to-air.

Kings coming over to put some spin on the situation to the gullable British press and say that belts don't matter and that this is a REAL world title fight blah blah blah. However, belts do matter and he will be still proclaiming Collazo as the World champion after Hatton flattens him in Boston and selling his next fight as a WBA defence

The Judah/Baldomir fiasco has opened another loophole to be exploited where Champions can fight, lose and still hold onto their belts by the Promoter not paying the fees. King will use this loophole more and more to protect his bargaining power.

So, at the time of speaking Ricky Hatton has vacated three belts, is going into a non-title fight, against a King fighter and really believes that this will put him in position to fight Mayweather.

Ricky said recently "If Junior Witter wins a top-three belt then I will fight him as he has something to offer. Without one I don't need him." Perhap's Maywether will return the comment and leave more egg on the Hatton's faces!

Does anyone wonder why, for the first time in 35 years, King didn't ask for options on Hatton before putting HIS champion in against a voluntary challenger. He doesn't think Collazo will win so did King know the truth way back then? Of course he did.

The German's are still not agreeing to step aside and no monetary offer has been made for him to do so. Sauerland and King don't get on and they won't be bought out so all in the Hatton garden is not looking rosy.

Is Ricky still earning that massive purse with no PPV?

Way to go, Fight Academy................................[/b]

There are several things about this post I don't quite understand. Be grateful for enlightenment.

1. You say damages to Mbaye will be awarded. For what? For sanctioning the Collazo fight as a WBA title fight? But later on you claim that this won't be a WBA title fight anyway. Which is it?

2. You say that the Judah/Baldomir fiasco has created a loophole whereby promoters dont pay sanctioning fees and their fighter hangs onto the belt. But surely the Baldomir situation is down to the fighter himself not paying the sanctioning fees?

3. Is your argument really that the Mayweather/Hatton fight depends on Hatton holding a world title at 147? Because I dont find that credible. Arguably not holding the WBA title could strengthen Hatton's hand because it will allow him to be ranked by the IBF at 147 and pressure Mayweather that way. But to be honest, we all know that the key factor in Mayweather/Hatton will be money. There are too many examples of two top 10 p4p fighters meeting with no belt at stake in recent years for me to buy this argument of yours if that is what you are claiming.

4. Finally, you make great play of the fact that King has not got options on Hatton. As if this proves all your theories. But you know, i know, King knows, the whole world knows that he would never have got options on Hatton. Hatton is one of the hottest properties in world boxing right now - if King thought he could get options on Hatton he would crawl on his arse through broken glass to get a sniff of them. As would all promoters. Including Sports Network.

1. M'Baye has lost out finacially because the WBA allowed him to be stepped over for Hatton V Maussa to happen and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished. He will be compensated due to the WBA's actions. If the WBA sanction Hatton's move up to 147 lbs then they will be allowing him to escape his obligation at 140 lbs and thus colluding with Hatton to damge M'bayes erning potential.


2. You are correct, but if a fighter is told not to pay the santion fee or his Promoter does not pay it to protect him, as per Baldomir, then he will hold his position by default as it was not a sanctioned defence. For Collazo this is a great insurance policy.

3. See your point and you may be right. It's my hunch that Mayweather being a free agent and a real difficult bastard to deal with will not want Hatton for no gain. He can make big money without Hatton, a danger man granted. Mayweather will prioce himselaf out of it now he has no promoter to do his business. The fact he paid Arum just $750k to buy his contract out suggests Arum was tired of him otherwise why so cheap? We both may turn out to be right, wait and see!

4. Hatton is not tyhe hottest commodity in boxing and that attitude is the reasons for his current problems. He has dissappeared off the radar since he beat Tszyu and his nteam are becoming a laughing stock among US factions. King wouldn't do business for no options that is my point, if he couldn't get them he would not deal. He did have options on Baldomir but sold them after the fight when Judah got to keep his belt and he signed for Mayweather. KIng did'nt ask or want oiptions on Mayweather as he knew it would be for no title. King's lawyer is Judd Bernstein who is coincidentally representing M'baye so he knows the legal score and has done from day one. As for all Promoters "Crawling through Broken Glass for Hatton" you are deluded on that one. He and Pop went to Arum, King, Hearn, Shaw, Main Events, The Duvas and even the old 'Walrus', Cedric Kushner and all declined his ridiculoius business plan so he goes to the second tier and find three ego-maniacs who were happy for the ride, enter Hobson, Waterman and Pellullo. He tried Showtime, BBC and ITV beofre settling at HBO and staying with Sky for a few quid despite tyhe lure of terrestrial TV. Be honest, what a sterling job they have now done between them!

It's a sad state of affairs and this shambolic event may be the wake up call Ricky needs before it is too late.

1. The WBA court point is interesting and thank you for the clarification there. Although, I have to say that for me personally - and I have no connection with Hatton - it would be a prime example if why legal battles pollute boxing. Whether the WBA were right or wrong to sanction the Maussa fight, sanctioning a different fight at a different weight should not be connected to it. M'baye's complaint ought to be limited to a belt he might have challenged for (140) and not a belt he has no intention of challenging for (147). His case is not the same as Urkal here.

2. Still don't see the relevance of this point. Unless you are arguing that the WBA will sanction the match and sanctioning fees will not be paid. If that happened that would be a huge cock up on Hattons part but there is no suggestion that that is the case. Is there?

3. Yeh true but look if Mayweather doesnt want to fight Hatton or vice versa, the whole belt situation is probably irrelevant.

4. I never said that Hatton was the hottest property, I said he was one of the hottest properties. I cant see how you can dispute that. Just as Joe C is now hot. Not as big as Morales, Barrera, Pacman, ODH sure. But he is hot and to deny that would be to look foolish. And Don King would try for options in a flash if he could get them. Maybe the deal with FA wont turn out to be the best move but Ricky as long as he keeps winning will continue to have lots of options. You seem to want to slag him off for speaking to a bunch of promoters and a bunch of channels but surely this is absolutely sound business practice. He is not tied, he should be speaking to everyone. If you think Rick is only with FA cos they are the only ones who will meet his money demands....well, that makes it the smart choice for him doesn't it? If you think that FA will fail to deliver the money or the fights or both then fair enough. But that has yet to be proven. The argument that by earning lots of money the Hattons are greedy is one that the Pope can make, the homeless on the street can make, the starving in Africa can make, but it is NOT an argument that Sports Network can make. Its a business baby.

lirva33 wrote:

don't call it a comeback wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote: I raised this point myself, and was staggered to learn that King had no options. However, it isn't the only time in 35 years, King didn't ask for options on Baldomir I believe.

Quite right. Its not the first time or the second time in 35 years. King has not had options on many fights during this period. And this includes occasions when he proposed fights on the basis that he did not ask for options. Boxingchat has got this one at least wrong.

no he hasn't. and i see you didn't respond to his excellent post.

[insert violent expletive here because I don't have anything to say to this debt-evading schizophrenic lowlife]

boxingchat wrote: 1. M'Baye has lost out finacially because the WBA allowed him to be stepped over for Hatton V Maussa to happen and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished. He will be compensated due to the WBA's actions. If the WBA sanction Hatton's move up to 147 lbs then they will be allowing him to escape his obligation at 140 lbs and thus colluding with Hatton to damge M'bayes erning potential.

There's things I disagree with in this whole post, but I'll stick to this point

The WBA cannot force Hatton to defend the 140 pound title if he wants to move up in weight. If the guy cannot / will not make the weight they cannot force him to, just as they can't force a fighter who'se retired to defend a belt. They can strip him of the title, end of story, but the WBA are solely responsible (in theory) for the administration.

M'Baye can fight for the vacated title. Your argument seems to be (with the phrase, "and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished") that M'Baye's earnings potential is linked to him fighting Hatton. Which firstly counters the argument that Hatton has fallen off the face of the earth. But secondly implies that any 'name' fighter moving up in weight or away from a belt should be sued by anyone calling him out, with the amount being pursued being the difference in earning between, say, a Lewis - Klitchko rematch and the Klitschko - Sanders vacant title match.

The whole premise of this 'lawsuit' idea is preposterous - a plastic arse could defen Hatton against a charge here. The WBA may be culpable with regard to M'Baye but that is entirely their outlook and will probably all be resolved either by M'Baye fighting for the vacant title or by some other quirk of fate, such as being dropped from the rankings through inactivity.

I realise that your point in the main is that it is the WBA who are responsible but the implication that they are 'colluding' with Hatton to 'damge M'bayes erning potential' has as much life in it as the letter 'a' on your keyboard.

don't call it a comeback wrote:
4. Finally, you make great play of the fact that King has not got options on Hatton. As if this proves all your theories. But you know, i know, King knows, the whole world knows that he would never have got options on Hatton. Hatton is one of the hottest properties in world boxing right now - if King thought he could get options on Hatton he would crawl on his arse through broken glass to get a sniff of them. As would all promoters. Including Sports Network.

Yes agree with that - I doubt King asked for options on De La Hoya when he fought Trinidad either did he? Sometimes it's just not worth asking, cause you already know the answer.

Coconut wrote:

boxingchat wrote: 1. M'Baye has lost out finacially because the WBA allowed him to be stepped over for Hatton V Maussa to happen and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished. He will be compensated due to the WBA's actions. If the WBA sanction Hatton's move up to 147 lbs then they will be allowing him to escape his obligation at 140 lbs and thus colluding with Hatton to damge M'bayes erning potential.

There's things I disagree with in this whole post, but I'll stick to this point

The WBA cannot force Hatton to defend the 140 pound title if he wants to move up in weight. If the guy cannot / will not make the weight they cannot force him to, just as they can't force a fighter who'se retired to defend a belt. They can strip him of the title, end of story, but the WBA are solely responsible (in theory) for the administration.

M'Baye can fight for the vacated title. Your argument seems to be (with the phrase, "and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished") that M'Baye's earnings potential is linked to him fighting Hatton. Which firstly counters the argument that Hatton has fallen off the face of the earth. But secondly implies that any 'name' fighter moving up in weight or away from a belt should be sued by anyone calling him out, with the amount being pursued being the difference in earning between, say, a Lewis - Klitchko rematch and the Klitschko - Sanders vacant title match.

The whole premise of this 'lawsuit' idea is preposterous - a plastic arse could defen Hatton against a charge here. The WBA may be culpable with regard to M'Baye but that is entirely their outlook and will probably all be resolved either by M'Baye fighting for the vacant title or by some other quirk of fate, such as being dropped from the rankings through inactivity.

I realise that your point in the main is that it is the WBA who are responsible but the implication that they are 'colluding' with Hatton to 'damage M'bayes earning potential' has as much life in it as the letter 'a' on your keyboard.

Again, you don't understand the facts of law. Mb'aye is suing the WBA, not Hatton. He was # 1 to Harris, Maussa and Hatton and was repeatedly stepped over so yes, his earnings have been diminished due to the WBA's actions. Why shouldn't he sue? If Hatton was treated thia way he would I feel sure in the same way Lennox Lewis did and everyone supported him.

The WBA have colluded with Hatton to avoid M'Baye by allowing the Maussa fight to go ahead instead of protecting M'Baye as their #1 contender. Now instead of protecting him they have given Hatton an escape route to fight at 147 where they will benefit further and M'Baye is left with his dick in his hand. Hatton is not being forced to make the weight at his own admission he can make the weight without any trouble.

As for plastic arse, he ai'nt doing much, believe me!

The point was that you make this sound like Hatton might as well be a co-defendant. He is not, and will not be, and the principles behind your idea are quite desperate. And the proposition that the WBA have carefully steered Hatton away from M'Baye with the purpose of shafting over FW's new contintal chum is just ridiculous. M'Baye may well have grounds to have a look but Hatton is clearly not culpable apart from being the person that the US networks and the WBA did not want to have fighting M'Baye for the title, on the basis that no fckr would m'buy M'Baye.



But it is nice to see the love for a shafted Frenchman is endemic even outside of Sports Network's charitable doors.

MightyWarrior wrote:

don't call it a comeback wrote:
4. Finally, you make great play of the fact that King has not got options on Hatton. As if this proves all your theories. But you know, i know, King knows, the whole world knows that he would never have got options on Hatton. Hatton is one of the hottest properties in world boxing right now - if King thought he could get options on Hatton he would crawl on his arse through broken glass to get a sniff of them. As would all promoters. Including Sports Network.

Yes agree with that - I doubt King asked for options on De La Hoya when he fought Trinidad either did he? Sometimes it's just not worth asking, cause you already know the answer.

Yes thats correct, the deal Arum did for that fight for ODH involved no options at all, theres other examples too e.g. Tyson v Holyfield etc. FW might have in mind that Don has never done a deal where he doesn't have options on both parties - thus Frank's own unhealthy obession with insisting on options - but it just isnt true.

boxingchat wrote:

Coconut wrote:

boxingchat wrote: 1. M'Baye has lost out finacially because the WBA allowed him to be stepped over for Hatton V Maussa to happen and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished. He will be compensated due to the WBA's actions. If the WBA sanction Hatton's move up to 147 lbs then they will be allowing him to escape his obligation at 140 lbs and thus colluding with Hatton to damge M'bayes erning potential.

There's things I disagree with in this whole post, but I'll stick to this point

The WBA cannot force Hatton to defend the 140 pound title if he wants to move up in weight. If the guy cannot / will not make the weight they cannot force him to, just as they can't force a fighter who'se retired to defend a belt. They can strip him of the title, end of story, but the WBA are solely responsible (in theory) for the administration.

M'Baye can fight for the vacated title. Your argument seems to be (with the phrase, "and now with Hatton vacating his earning's will be diminished") that M'Baye's earnings potential is linked to him fighting Hatton. Which firstly counters the argument that Hatton has fallen off the face of the earth. But secondly implies that any 'name' fighter moving up in weight or away from a belt should be sued by anyone calling him out, with the amount being pursued being the difference in earning between, say, a Lewis - Klitchko rematch and the Klitschko - Sanders vacant title match.

The whole premise of this 'lawsuit' idea is preposterous - a plastic arse could defen Hatton against a charge here. The WBA may be culpable with regard to M'Baye but that is entirely their outlook and will probably all be resolved either by M'Baye fighting for the vacant title or by some other quirk of fate, such as being dropped from the rankings through inactivity.

I realise that your point in the main is that it is the WBA who are responsible but the implication that they are 'colluding' with Hatton to 'damage M'bayes earning potential' has as much life in it as the letter 'a' on your keyboard.

Again, you don't understand the facts of law. Mb'aye is suing the WBA, not Hatton. He was # 1 to Harris, Maussa and Hatton and was repeatedly stepped over so yes, his earnings have been diminished due to the WBA's actions. Why shouldn't he sue? If Hatton was treated thia way he would I feel sure in the same way Lennox Lewis did and everyone supported him.

The WBA have colluded with Hatton to avoid M'Baye by allowing the Maussa fight to go ahead instead of protecting M'Baye as their #1 contender. Now instead of protecting him they have given Hatton an escape route to fight at 147 where they will benefit further and M'Baye is left with his dick in his hand. Hatton is not being forced to make the weight at his own admission he can make the weight without any trouble.

As for plastic arse, he ai'nt doing much, believe me!

The HBO poster giving Hatton the big build up..Collazo doesn't even get a mention, which he must be pleased about!
http://www.hbo.com/boxing/img/downloads ... hatton.jpg

Either the Tattoos have been airbrushed or that is not Hatton's body?

That isn't a photo mate, it's an illustration.

That is a photo IMO. One of them arty ones!

If it was an illustration thye would have used his known shorts and added the tats whilst still making him look cut.

That is not his body they've cut and shut the fat little bastard!

Spose, could be a photoshopped photo, but it doesn't look that real, certainly the body doesn't. Think it might be a photoshopped face, grafted onto an illustration of a boxer and ring, the hand wraps for instance are obviously not real.

Take it back, it is just a photoshopped photograph, and I don't think with that angle they would have needed to do anything to ricky's body.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Think it might be a photoshopped face, grafted onto an illustration of a boxer

Why does it remind me of John Mugabi draped on the ropes after turning his back against Duane Thomas in 1986!