BoxRec

Gatti vs Hatton at Welterweight.....this would have been awesome! - any opinions?.....

ade the grenade wrote:Gatti vs Hatton at Welterweight.....this would have been awesome! - any opinions?.....

I'd take Gatti, even though their respective performances against FMJ indicate Hatton would fare better. Just feel Gatti is the wrong fighter for Hatton.

Hatton by an absolute mile on points or late stoppage.

Tomasino wrote:

ade the grenade wrote:Gatti vs Hatton at Welterweight.....this would have been awesome! - any opinions?.....

I'd take Gatti, even though their respective performances against FMJ indicate Hatton would fare better. Just feel Gatti is the wrong fighter for Hatton.

Would you take Mickey Ward over Hatton as well?

BoxBuzz wrote:

Tomasino wrote:

ade the grenade wrote:Gatti vs Hatton at Welterweight.....this would have been awesome! - any opinions?.....

I'd take Gatti, even though their respective performances against FMJ indicate Hatton would fare better. Just feel Gatti is the wrong fighter for Hatton.

Would you take Mickey Ward over Hatton as well?

I'd give him a chance for sure especially in USA. Hatton had friendly reffing most of his career. I didn't like it.

Winner - the fans. Hatton vs Cotto was the one I always wanted but i would settle for this

Hatton for me, but not without cuts above both eyes

Tomasino wrote:

I'd give him a chance for sure especially in USA. Hatton had friendly reffing most of his career. I didn't like it.

Like in the mayweather fight, where the ref let him do....eh....feck all

davie wrote:

Tomasino wrote:

I'd give him a chance for sure especially in USA. Hatton had friendly reffing most of his career. I didn't like it.

Like in the mayweather fight, where the ref let him do....eh....feck all

One fight

Ricky by late KO/TKO at 140. Ricky wide UD at 147. Levels.

Hatton wasn't as effective at welter, at light welter he'd have chewed Gatti up in a war.

Gattis overated cos he was in wars.

Ricky would be too strong.

Fun while it lasts tho.

I don't see that fight as being a war really. Hatton could box smart when he wanted to; I think he'd win a wide points decision.

davie wrote:

Tomasino wrote:

I'd give him a chance for sure especially in USA. Hatton had friendly reffing most of his career. I didn't like it.

Like in the mayweather fight, where the ref let him do....eh....feck all

Are referee's supposed to let you foul constantly?

Neither Hatton or Gatti were great fighters.
When they fought great fighters (Mayweather, De la Hoya, and Pacquiao) they could not compete.

Gatti gets ripped for being overrated. From the standpoint of being in the Hall of Fame, of course he should not be in.

However, he was a good fighter. A lot of people remember him just for the 3 Ward fights towards the end of his career. However, throughout his career went out of his way to fight other good fighters. Many of them could just as easily be in the HOF as he is. They weren't great, but they were good.

Tracy Patterson, Gabriel Ruelas, Angel Manfredy, Ivan Robinson, were all pretty good fighters. Gatti took them all on (Patterson and Robinson 2x) in very competitive fights. He won some and lost some.

At least he was willing to constantly fight tough opponents, some multiple times. You can't say that about some fighters, can you?

re: the hall of fame:

I have to say that I often kid about it not being the "hall of skill".

But it is the fighters like Gatti, who though they don't have the top skill levels, perhaps should be voted in.

If a fighter has added substance to the sport via his draw with the public, or the excitement he generates by competing, or his publically displayed "spirit" I think he honestly should be considered.

Boxing is an "art"...of the martial variety....and purists do want to keep "skill" at the center.

But "passion" and "excitement factor" should not be ruled out as other ways to get achieve this honor.

Are their any managers in? Or promoters? Just curious.

Gatti and Hamed come to mind as a couple of the folks who might be able to achieve this status when this aspect is added to the list of things that allows one to be considered as eligible candidates.

Hall of Skill doesn't have much of a ring to it, does it? Besides there is more to boxing than just skill. Things like effort, stamina, and smarts play a role as well.

It should be about how good the guy was. The fame part will grow if the guy is elected.

Yes there are managers and promoters who are in; some of them should not be in either.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Hall of Skill doesn't have much of a ring to it, does it? Besides there is more to boxing than just skill. Things like effort, stamina, and smarts play a role as well.

It should be about how good the guy was. The fame part will grow if the guy is elected.

Yes there are managers and promoters who are in; some of them should not be in either.

It should be about how good the guy was but...

Regardless of how they should or should not be selected if the fame part didn't happen during their fighting days having their name on a plaque in a tiny museum is not going to make them famous afterwards.
As time goes by they are just a name on a wall in a building with an ever increasing number of names on plaques on walls.

Being in the Hall of Fame does help people know who you are or were. In 30 or 40 years, someone looking through who is in the Hall of Fame will see the name Arturo Gatti. That will help his name recognition. They will look up record, look at him on film, etc. If he is not in the Hall of Fame, he would be largely forgotton. There are other fighters who are borderline or have no right to be in that are remembered more than more deserving fighters who are not.

mrbassie wrote:

davie wrote:

Tomasino wrote:

I'd give him a chance for sure especially in USA. Hatton had friendly reffing most of his career. I didn't like it.

Like in the mayweather fight, where the ref let him do....eh....feck all

Are referee's supposed to let you foul constantly?

[Bites back comment regarding Cortez's leniency in several fights towards Mayweather's elbows, forearms, hip-punches & just about anything else he wanted to do between the ropes, 'cos he knows some people just refuse to acknowledge it no matter how many times it's pointed out]

Datsue wrote:
Bites back comment regarding Cortez's leniency in several fights towards Mayweather's elbows, forearms, hip-punches & just about anything else he wanted to do between the ropes, 'cos he knows some people just refuse to acknowledge it no matter how many times it's pointed out]

Dose of his own medicine, no sympathy.

Hatton would have beaten Gatti up pretty good and stopped him late.

Hatton beat so many fighters who were clearly better than Gatti. There was, the 34 year old Tszyu who had one fight in the previous 29 months, and ..... well really nobody. However, we just know that Hatton was so much better, well, just because.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Hatton beat so many fighters who were clearly better than Gatti. There was, the 34 year old Tszyu who had one fight in the previous 29 months, and ..... well really nobody. However, we just know that Hatton was so much better, well, just because.

The power of "on a account of because", is profoundly imposing and leaves a dark shadow on all that is.

Hatton. Gatti had too many guts and too little defense. I loved to watch Gatti a much more exciting fighter than Hatton but I have to go with Hatton.

this fight I like Hatton to win on points but I can remember how he fought against Manny Pacquiao, once he got caught he was gone and Gatti could really let them go and turn a boxing match into an all out brawl and as good as Hatton was I think he'd get drawn into a brawl with Gatti and that would be the end of the fight soon after either by a punch that round or by him being burnt out from the exchange.

Gatti by KO or stoppage in the middle rounds