BoxRec

thepocketrocket wrote:Such wise words Hitman...

witter's in little league.

i don't know why i bother really.

hitman_hatton1 wrote:

thepocketrocket wrote:Such wise words Hitman...

witter's in little league.

i don't know why i bother really.

If gives all the Witter fans something to talk about...its your charity work

Carbo wrote:

Twisted Transistor wrote:Maybe Tszyu wasn't past his best because of his fighting once a year schedule. Even before the Injuries he was only fighting once a year.

Fighting once a year could say he wasn't as beat up so thats why he didn't look past his best also.

So I do have an argument.

So because most ranked Mitchell past Hatton that justifies It? Mitchell seemed an average title holder.

You can;t always use opposition to solely judge a fighter, when Calzaghe has stepped up he's still won, so I would put him ahead of Hatton.

What on Earth are you rambling on about? Fighting once a year means he wasn't beat up, so he didn't look past his best, and therefore you have an argument? EH? Am I missing something?

You know, if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck then it probably is a fekking duck. Does the fact that Tszyu didn't look shot at any stage before of during the Hatton fight up until the 9th or 10th not make you think, 'jeez, he doesn't look shot, or even on the slide, so maybe he's not.'

Car to enlighten us by telling the whole class from which evidence or logical deduction you plucked this argument you have from?

And what do you mean when you say, 'you can;t always use opposition to solely judge a fighter, when Calzaghe has stepped up he's still won, so I would put him ahead of Hatton'?

Has Hatton not won when he's stepped up, too?

I just don't get any of your points. They make no sense at all to me.

I meant maybe the lack of fighting once a year means he wasn't beat up because less fighting equals less punches taken compared to fighters who fight 2 to 4 times a year.

So I said he was generally fresher than most fighters.

I didn't say Tszyu was shot either, the duck bit Is gibberish yet you say I'm not making sense? What can't you understand? Be specific.

I was talking about how people are putting Hatton ahead of Calzaghe based on opposition, other than Tszyu, who can you really use? Castillo wasn't exactly a Barrera or Chavez league Mexican. Jose looked chosen at the right time like Warren chose Tszyu at the right time.

The opponents Hatton chose after Tszyu could be compared to be on the league of fighters Joe fought, belts don't justify them as good enough for his supposed legacy.

Yes Hatton won when he stepped up for Tszyu but thats all most Hatton fans have and use to argue to say he's a higher p4p than Calzaghe. Hatton has to take them to war while Calzaghe outclasses them with relative ease.

Calzaghe schooled his big fight opponents while Hatton took them to war and had to battle, would he have been as sucessful without workrate? Without his workrate he would of lost to Callazo.

Hatton for me, now fairly clearly.

I thought before that Hatton's one win in "A" class and Calzaghe's numours wins in "B" class, but with no "A" class wins made them a very equal. However, with the manner of Calzaghe's "B" class wins (pretty emphatic, except Reid), and given Hatton's performances in "B" class (a bit hit and miss) it could have been argued that the Tszyu performance was a one off and never to be matched.... So before Tszyu I gave Calzaghe the edge, cause I don't like ranking fighters solely on one fight... although its hard not to in some cases (e.g. Mayorga a few years back, Taylor now)

However, now Hatton has two emphatic wins in "A" class I think it makes a world of difference, Calzaghe aint proved himself against "A" class and is only "A" class based on his number of wins at lower levels. Hatton has shown the Tszyu fight was no fluke. Calzaghe needs to beat a Hopkins or Kessler to be back in the debate again IMO.

You've saved me a lot of typing there, Stu. I would also add that Hatton pre-Tszyu - i.e. before he was champ (I don't count the WBU) - faced some fighters (Tackie, Oliveira, Magee) who were of higher quality than some of Joe's opponents during his WBO reign.

I'm asking If Hatton would be so successful though without his workrate though?

He was with Urango but Urango was a boy against a man In there.

Not seen the other two you mentioned.

Twisted Transistor wrote:I'm asking If Hatton would be so successful though without his workrate though?

He was with Urango but Urango was a boy against a man In there.

Not seen the other two you mentioned.

A bit like asking if PBF would be as successful without his excellent speed.

SticknMove wrote:

Twisted Transistor wrote:I'm asking If Hatton would be so successful though without his workrate though?

He was with Urango but Urango was a boy against a man In there.

Not seen the other two you mentioned.

A bit like asking if PBF would be as successful without his excellent speed.

Floyd boxes though too.

Would Joe Calzaghe have been so successful without his workrate?

If Joe only threw 10 punches a round vs Lacy, then Jeff might have won.

Joe's main strength is his workrate also, certainly not his defense.

Twisted Transistor wrote: Floyd boxes though too.

but he uses his speed to box

stujones wrote:Would Joe Calzaghe have been so successful without his workrate?

If Joe only threw 10 punches a round vs Lacy, then Jeff might have won.

Joe's main strength is his workrate also, certainly not his defense.

Jeff had no Jab In that fight, Joe could of still outboxed him.

Joe has workrate and reflexes too but he uses skill as well.

Only sneaky rights usually break his defence.

Twisted Transistor wrote:

stujones wrote:Would Joe Calzaghe have been so successful without his workrate?

If Joe only threw 10 punches a round vs Lacy, then Jeff might have won.

Joe's main strength is his workrate also, certainly not his defense.

Jeff had no Jab In that fight, Joe could of still outboxed him.

Joe has workrate and reflexes too but he uses skill as well.

Only sneaky rights usually break his defence.

Sakio Bika, Kabery Salem and Robin Reid are hardly known for their quick hands - yet Joe's apparent quick reflexes were not quick enough to take shot after shot and mark up in these fights.

Sneaky? So sneaky that you could hear Bika's corner shouting "right hand", Sakio would oblige and land. From the mid point of that fight, the ONLY rounds Bika lost were the rounds he (for some strange reason) stopped throwing the right.

So sneaky that Woodhall was LEADING with the right hand and was doing well but utimately out strengthed.

Joe has alot of good things don't get me wrong, but I would love to work with guys like Kessler, Hopkins, Froch, maybe even Woods if they signed to fight Joe. I'm convinced he is very beatable, had fighters fight the right (litterally "right") fight. The only one who truly fought the right fight was Woodhall. Think Kessler, Froch and Hopkins beat him if they just focus on the straight right hand down the pipe.

stujones wrote: Joe's main strength is his workrate also, certainly not his defense.

His feet make for an excellent defense in their own right

I think this will be a more interesting thread after:

Calazage-Kessler
Hatton-Mayweather

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:I think this will be a more interesting thread after:

Calazage-Kessler
Hatton-Mayweather

Not sure I agree, great fights the pair of them - However, Hatton is rumoured to be fighting the #1 P4P guy (at a better weight for Floyd than Ricky)... Calzaghe is fighting someone not in the P4P top twenty.

So if Hatton wins its case closed, if Hatton loses and JC wins - then it will be the "Kessler is overhyped" lines and we haven't got anywhere.

stujones wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:I think this will be a more interesting thread after:

Calazage-Kessler
Hatton-Mayweather

Not sure I agree, great fights the pair of them - However, Hatton is rumoured to be fighting the #1 P4P guy (at a better weight for Floyd than Ricky)... Calzaghe is fighting someone not in the P4P top twenty.

So if Hatton wins its case closed, if Hatton loses and JC wins - then it will be the "Kessler is overhyped" lines and we haven't got anywhere.

Kessler is ranked at No. 15 on the Boxrec forum P4P list, so many do consider him to be in the top 20 P4P.

I don't think Calzaghe is going to receive to much stick for beating Kessler.

stujones wrote:

Twisted Transistor wrote:

stujones wrote:Would Joe Calzaghe have been so successful without his workrate?

If Joe only threw 10 punches a round vs Lacy, then Jeff might have won.

Joe's main strength is his workrate also, certainly not his defense.

Jeff had no Jab In that fight, Joe could of still outboxed him.

Joe has workrate and reflexes too but he uses skill as well.

Only sneaky rights usually break his defence.

Sakio Bika, Kabery Salem and Robin Reid are hardly known for their quick hands - yet Joe's apparent quick reflexes were not quick enough to take shot after shot and mark up in these fights.

Sneaky? So sneaky that you could hear Bika's corner shouting "right hand", Sakio would oblige and land. From the mid point of that fight, the ONLY rounds Bika lost were the rounds he (for some strange reason) stopped throwing the right.

So sneaky that Woodhall was LEADING with the right hand and was doing well but utimately out strengthed.

Joe has alot of good things don't get me wrong, but I would love to work with guys like Kessler, Hopkins, Froch, maybe even Woods if they signed to fight Joe. I'm convinced he is very beatable, had fighters fight the right (litterally "right") fight. The only one who truly fought the right fight was Woodhall. Think Kessler, Froch and Hopkins beat him if they just focus on the straight right hand down the pipe.

He gets hit with the rights I don't deny but I really don't see that many hit him.

Bika only landed a few In one round then was dirty and spoling the rest of the fight.