BoxRec

Hatton had the most balls.

And losing by KO to Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao is absolutely nothing to be ashamed by.

Both of the above are more dominant that Barerra was if we're honest.

noone will ever be as good as naz should have been.the only reason he lost to barerra was because he wasn't puttin the training in.if he trained all the way through his career like he did when he first started out then noone would have come close and that includes the mayweathers/pacmans of today.he never reached his full potential and sadly we only got a glimpse of what he was really capable of .

Kelly was also on the slide when he fought Hamed.

Hamed had the talent but not the tempermant as soon as he lost he was ruined whereas Hatton didnt have as much skill but had the desire and wanted to fight the best

hamed never got banged out so i'll say him

hurlock wrote:hamed never got banged out so i'll say him

yeah it was only cos he got defensive in those last 2 rds against barrera that he never.

hatton's had a better career.

no doubts.

The best?

Hamed for me, and by quite some margin.

Stick a fork in this thread its done

Hamed by miles

Hamed was way better than Hatton.

Hamed's only problem was that he never really learnt (or never wanted to learn, I should say) how to 'box', as for some bizarre reason, he thought his power was a gift.

Syntax Error wrote:Hamed was way better than Hatton.

Hamed's only problem was that he never really learnt (or never wanted to learn, I should say) how to 'box', as for some bizarre reason, he thought his power was a gift.

i think once hamed got abit top heavy his waist movement went & he went more flat footed banging making him easier to hit,but boy was he exciting almost like that walsh bro DD

Hattons made a far bigger impact on boxing than Nas, Hattons paved the way for giant purse UK v US fights, something that had all but ceased in the last decade. Nas never beat anyone worth remembering its easy to look amazing against poor competition to me Khan is probably better than Nas at the moment and he hasnt even matured yet.

Hattons got in the ring with the best in the world.

Hamed and Calzaghe are both superior fighters to Hatton for me. Hatton might have fought marginally better competition overall, but he was never as good as the other two modern greats. Or Lennox, obviously.

Naz was the most physically talented fighter I've ever seen. At his peak he looked superhuman. Unfortunately, he committed the crime of becoming complacent.

kingfinn wrote:Hattons made a far bigger impact on boxing than Nas, Hattons paved the way for giant purse UK v US fights, something that had all but ceased in the last decade. Nas never beat anyone worth remembering its easy to look amazing against poor competition to me Khan is probably better than Nas at the moment and he hasnt even matured yet.

Hattons got in the ring with the best in the world.

I'm going to ignore everything you ever say in the future.

Hatton has done amazingly well to make the UK US transition, but Naz was fighting headlining MSG 10 years ago. He paved the way, Hatton picked up the baton and ran with it.

Khan will NEVER be 1/10 the fighter Naz was. I like them both, Hatton and Hamen, and I respect Hatton's achievements - but Naz was the one fighter who really could have been p4p greatness. In some ways his massive punch was his downfall, cause had he not come to rely on it he had the potential skills to be unbelievable.

ArtOfWar wrote:Hamed was a better fighter, but Hatton stepped up to the plate more.

Bottom line is Hatton stepped up to the plate twice and got tanned! Hamed only done it once.

Some people on this thread maybe want to take a look at what Hatton beat defending that WBU belt and than take a look at Hamed who unofficially unified the featherweight division against far better fighters than Ricky ever fought

nobby_nobbins wrote:Naz was the most physically talented fighter I've ever seen. At his peak he looked superhuman. Unfortunately, he committed the crime of becoming complacent.

This is just stupidity, unless you've never *seen* Roy Jones, FLoyd mayweather, Sugary Ray Leonard, Sugar Ray Robinson, Roberto Duran, etc.

Hamed by an absolute country mile!

sharpei_louis wrote:

kingfinn wrote:Hattons made a far bigger impact on boxing than Nas, Hattons paved the way for giant purse UK v US fights, something that had all but ceased in the last decade. Nas never beat anyone worth remembering its easy to look amazing against poor competition to me Khan is probably better than Nas at the moment and he hasnt even matured yet.

Hattons got in the ring with the best in the world.

I'm going to ignore everything you ever say in the future.

Hatton has done amazingly well to make the UK US transition, but Naz was fighting headlining MSG 10 years ago. He paved the way, Hatton picked up the baton and ran with it.

Khan will NEVER be 1/10 the fighter Naz was. I like them both, Hatton and Hamen, and I respect Hatton's achievements - but Naz was the one fighter who really could have been p4p greatness. In some ways his massive punch was his downfall, cause had he not come to rely on it he had the potential skills to be unbelievable.

If you read what i said properly i said giant purse UK v US fights ceased in the last decade. Plus there werent any good US lightweights / super feather weights out there when Nas was about, to my knowledge barrera isnt american!

"Khan will NEVER be 1/10 the fighter Naz was" Nas was fighting nobodies in a poor division, this is probably one of the strongest divisions now Khans already 5/10 the fighter Nas was.

kingfinn wrote:

sharpei_louis wrote:

kingfinn wrote:Hattons made a far bigger impact on boxing than Nas, Hattons paved the way for giant purse UK v US fights, something that had all but ceased in the last decade. Nas never beat anyone worth remembering its easy to look amazing against poor competition to me Khan is probably better than Nas at the moment and he hasnt even matured yet.

Hattons got in the ring with the best in the world.

I'm going to ignore everything you ever say in the future.

Hatton has done amazingly well to make the UK US transition, but Naz was fighting headlining MSG 10 years ago. He paved the way, Hatton picked up the baton and ran with it.

Khan will NEVER be 1/10 the fighter Naz was. I like them both, Hatton and Hamen, and I respect Hatton's achievements - but Naz was the one fighter who really could have been p4p greatness. In some ways his massive punch was his downfall, cause had he not come to rely on it he had the potential skills to be unbelievable.

If you read what i said properly i said giant purse UK v US fights ceased in the last decade. Plus there werent any good US lightweights / super feather weights out there when Nas was about, to my knowledge barrera isnt american!

"Khan will NEVER be 1/10 the fighter Naz was" Nas was fighting nobodies in a poor division, this is probably one of the strongest divisions now Khans already 5/10 the fighter Nas was.

So you've gone from Khan is probably better than Naz, to he's half (a better way of expressing 5/10!!) the fighter....

So you've gone from Khan is probably better than Naz, to he's half (a better way of expressing 5/10!!) the fighter....

5/10 as in terms of acheivement. Note the world title shot on the 27th of june.

Hamed by a country mile, what a wast of talent though.

Here's the mad part, ask most Americans and they would think it's a toss up.

Some people just dont get it.

In fact if they were the same size I rekon Hamed would a a 'Hardy' on Hatton.

From what I see Ricky's a better human being though.

Jon Saxon wrote:In fact if they were the same size I rekon Hamed would a a 'Hardy' on Hatton.

From what I see Ricky's a better human being though.

I don't agree with your first line. Yes, I think prime for prime, P4P Hamed was better - but I would say Ricky is better and more sturdier than Ingle who gave Hamed one or two problems. Thats the type of fight I would see.

stujones wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:In fact if they were the same size I rekon Hamed would a a 'Hardy' on Hatton.

From what I see Ricky's a better human being though.

I don't agree with your first line. Yes, I think prime for prime, P4P Hamed was better - but I would say Ricky is better and more sturdier than Ingle who gave Hamed one or two problems. Thats the type of fight I would see.

Mate that want prime Hamed against Ingle.

But more importantly let's not forget this...
Ingle had great head movement.

KO in 2 (max)

Agree on the superior head movement, but Hatton did things better than Ingle also.

I just think his chin would have been too sturdy not to fall in 2...