BoxRec

How do you rate Ricky "The Hitman" Hatton. It looks like his fighting days are behind him, and so now we can look back at his 47 fights and judge him based on that:

So, what do you think.

I would class Ricky has a Great fighter. Since becoming a World Champion in 2005, he fought top fighters for 4 years.

His losses against Mayweather and Pacquaio are by no means disgraceful, over the past 2 years these boxers have proven themslves as the standout fighter of this generation, no doubt.

His victories over Tszyu, Maussa, Collazo, Urango, Castillo, Lazcano and Malignaggi were each good perofrmances and they showed thaty Hatton could consistently beat the top contenders.

I wpould have liked to have seen Hatton match up against Cotto and Witter but you cant have everything.

Pacquiao and Mawyeather are great fighters, Hatton was a good one. The last five guys you mentioned weren't anything special when Hatton beat them and he had major problems with Collazo. Maybe they were contenders at the time, but then again, Chris Arreola is a heavyweight contender. I think Cotto is a better fighter than Hatton was. At 140 that is a close matchup. At 147 Hatton gets stopped or clearly beaten.

Hatton is a likeable guy who had a lot of heart and an entertaining style. I just can't put him in the "great" category.

he was about 5'6

Good fighter, win over Tsyzu was good, but overrated. Dominated in his other big matches, kind of a sour note to end his career (if this is the end.) No shame in going down to a great fighter but it was so soon and it wasn't like it was an old version of Ricky.

Counter-puncher wrote:he was about 5'6

Beat me to it!

crusader wrote:he had major problems with Collazo.

I think that had to do more with the fact that Hatton was not comfortable at Welterweight and he struggled to go get going while carrying the excess pounds.

crusader wrote:I just can't put him in the "great" category.

What is stopping you? Is it lack of opposition? He didn't ahcieve enough? Didn't win enough titles?

Very good fighter, during all of his run I don't know if I ever would've had him on P4P list though. Still, Hatton was a very solid fighter.

Very good but definitely not a great fighter. One 'great' win over Tsyzu and then his other wins are over decent contenders of the era but nothing great. His next best win is Paulie Mag, followed perhaps by a washed up Castillo (who after that fight really showed how shot he'd become)
Maussa, Lazcano, Urango are ok fighters but very weak contenders from a historical standpoint. I thought he lost to Collazo. And then of course in his two big step-ups he got KTFO.

Cheating scumbag

tzyuforever wrote:Cheating scumbag

truest werds ever typed

tzyuforever wrote:Cheating scumbag

I sence bias here. And I know why.

Hatton was a very good fighter of this generation, but not a great. Picked up some very good wins in his career but aside from Kostya no other great results. He gave mayweather a decent amount to think about and if it wasnt for that ring post headbutt im fairly confident he would have seen the final bell. The pac loss was devestating, and he asked for it with the way he went about that figh.

Crease wrote:

tzyuforever wrote:Cheating scumbag

I sence bias here. And I know why.

"It's not a tickling contest" sick of hearing that.

dempseyfire wrote:Very good but definitely not a great fighter. One 'great' win over Tsyzu and then his other wins are over decent contenders of the era but nothing great. His next best win is Paulie Mag, followed perhaps by a washed up Castillo (who after that fight really showed how shot he'd become)
Maussa, Lazcano, Urango are ok fighters but very weak contenders from a historical standpoint. I thought he lost to Collazo. And then of course in his two big step-ups he got KTFO.

That is pretty much how I see it ( Though I gave him the Collazo fight by 1 point.)

Had he been competitive with Mayweahter and Pacman it might be a different story. A great fighter would have alteast been competitive and a "Legend" probably would have won. A great fighter probably would have beaten Collazo easily even if it was his first fight at 147.

The win over Tszyu is not really that big of a deal. Tsyzu was 34 years old and had 1 fight in the last 29 months before this fight.

He was a good fighter and nothing more. There really is not anything to back up him being more than that. However, in a few years he will be voted into the Hall of Fame ahead of scores of more deserving fighters.

He will become somewhat under-rated in the years to come. Very few can leave their time in the ring having only lost to legitimate, all-time legends (such as Frazier & only a handful of others have done), & Hatton will be among those. Not saying by any means that's what it took, at a minimum, to beat the guy, but it speaks well of him. His victory over Tszyu is definitely not about criticism on a few levels, but it gets a little bit too much heat, IMO. Hatton fought a brilliant fight against a great fighter who was not quite as diminished as retrospect now says.

Still, he is short of all-time great status.

Yes he only lost to great fighters, but he has no wins over great fighters. His overall competition was much weaker than Joe Frazier.
Frazier has one win over a great fighter, and was competitive in two other fights. Frazier also had other wins over that were more impressive than Hatton's "big win" over a past it Tsyu.

It is hard to fathom how Hatton could ever be underrated unless he is completely forgotton. He won't be because he won some meaningless WBS titles and will underservingly make the Hall of Fame.

Good fighter, not great. Great is a word which is used far too freely imo.I don't think he'd have had such a good career if not for day before weigh ins. He was one of those guys who're able to cut weight and not take too much of a performance hit. When he moved up to welterweight there was a notable dip in his performances fighting against guys at around the same weight as him when they actually got in the ring.

Ambling Alp wrote:Yes he only lost to great fighters, but he has no wins over great fighters. His overall competition was much weaker than Joe Frazier.
Frazier has one win over a great fighter, and was competitive in two other fights. Frazier also had other wins over that were more impressive than Hatton's "big win" over a past it Tsyu.

It is hard to fathom how Hatton could ever be underrated unless he is completely forgotton. He won't be because he won some meaningless WBS titles and will underservingly make the Hall of Fame.

I wasn't comparing him, or his career, to Joe Frazier. I drew a parallel, in that both retired having only ever been beaten by all-time legends of the sport. Gene Tunney is another, arguably Joe Louis as well.

That's not a direct comparison.

Goodnight, Irene wrote: Very few can leave their time in the ring having only lost to legitimate, all-time legends (such as Frazier & only a handful of others have done), & Hatton will be among those. Not saying by any means that's what it took, at a minimum, to beat the guy, but it speaks well of him. .

hmm, true. good point.

I'd say he was a very good fighter and a genuine World Champion, but I would stop short of calling him great, he simply didn't beat enough A list fighters.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Yes he only lost to great fighters, but he has no wins over great fighters. His overall competition was much weaker than Joe Frazier.
Frazier has one win over a great fighter, and was competitive in two other fights. Frazier also had other wins over that were more impressive than Hatton's "big win" over a past it Tsyu.

It is hard to fathom how Hatton could ever be underrated unless he is completely forgotton. He won't be because he won some meaningless WBS titles and will underservingly make the Hall of Fame.

I wasn't comparing him, or his career, to Joe Frazier. I drew a parallel, in that both retired having only ever been beaten by all-time legends of the sport. Gene Tunney is another, arguably Joe Louis as well.

That's not a direct comparison.

Ok. That's fair enough. I just thought your earlier post gave the impression that you may be comparing him to Frazier. Your earlier post also seemed to give the impression that only a great fighter could beat Hatton which of course it would not. However I see that you since said that you don't think it would have.

A true world class fighter. And a great for Great Britain, no doubt...

In terms of the history of the sport then in the famed P4P list I don't see him as a top 100 fighter.

Felt he could have done better against Mayweather, not won, but pushed him harder than he did.

Ezzard wrote:Felt he could have done better against Mayweather, not won, but pushed him harder than he did.

I still feel that the ref, Joe Cortez was overzealous in that fight.

*Each time Hatton got on the inside of Mayweather, Cortez would break it up.

*Each time Ricky caught up with Floyd, Cortez would break it up.

*Each timre Hatton had Mayweather in the corner,Cortez would break it up.

With the refs constant interference prohibting Hatton's gameplan, "The Hitman" stood no chance at all.

And it was a shame,because I belueve that Hatton had the tools to beat Mayweather.

Crease wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Felt he could have done better against Mayweather, not won, but pushed him harder than he did.

I still feel that the ref, Joe Cortez was overzealous in that fight.

*Each time Hatton got on the inside of Mayweather, Cortez would break it up.

*Each time Ricky caught up with Floyd, Cortez would break it up.

*Each timre Hatton had Mayweather in the corner,Cortez would break it up.

With the refs constant interference prohibting Hatton's gameplan, "The Hitman" stood no chance at all.

And it was a shame,because I belueve that Hatton had the tools to beat Mayweather.

What goes around, comes around, I guess. Hatton had his share of good fortune (if one could be optimistic enough to call it that) against Tszyu.