Greater all-time boxer: Hatton or Froch?

Don't do all time rankings before careers have finshed.:hey

 

Neither are very good in the scheme of things. But Carl Froch walks it by a country mile now....and even he's limited.

 

Neither are "very good"?

Both are multiple times world champions, I think that qualifies them as good

If they aren't good then what is, because there isn't many between them and the very top level

Anyway on the question I'd say froch, even though Hatton is a little bit more skilled, Frochs dedication and mentality have carried him that bit further, Hatton wore himself out very early with abusing his body and just lost that little bit extra in the tank. It was obvious by the collazo fight that Hatton was slightly over the hill.

That said I do wish him luck and I hope this time he goes out on a high because he's definitely very underrated

 

Not very good = 99.999% of all fighters???

 

Hatton.

 

Hatton for his contribution to the sport overall.

 

:deal

 

No offence OP but I will ignore the 'all-time' bit.

Hatton

Brit legend, it was great following him, top draw bloke, well promoted, on tv all the time, ****** dragged the life out of him but eventually he got the tszyu fight. He won and he was the best LWW around, unbeaten, no wonder he was full of beans - I was too.

Hatton had the nuts to chase and chase the ultimate goal, P4P, but got out done due to a) rubbish tactics, b) basics, and c) taking on the best.

Froch

He has had more exciting fights (toe to toe) with better opponents than hatton as Ricky kept fighting for the WBU belt for years and after that he kept saying "well, I wasnt at my best" for every fight bar the Castillo fight.
Froch looked good but for some weird reason decided to drop his hands and not finish combinations.
But tactically against AA and then the complete chang of tactics against Bute means Froch for me. He learnt, Hatton didnt.

Stop talking Rutzy!

Sorry lads...

 

I think the fact Hatton was the man at his division and the Tszyu fight save him a bit.

As said Froch still has more fights to go to make it a lot more clear but right now I think its very close. If Froch rematches Ward and gets blasted in 2 his stock will plummet. Hatton wasted a lot of his career fighting clevesque opponents.

 

We did this not long ago.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=319062

Enjoy Aaron :good

 

Probably agree with most of that. Its a good call, you are persuading me to hatton now!! Not a bad thing. But 2 weight? Yeah but not reeeaaally.

I dont know why but I still think that Froch's win against Bute edges him because he changed his tactics. Hatton got KO'd by Mayweather doing the EXACT same thing Mayweather was taking the **** out of during that 24/7 lark. Hatton didnt have the tactical mind. Then again, Froch didnt for a few fights but he was always good to watch. Like Hatton!!

Argh, **** off OP!! :good

 

This content is protected

1. Hatton had his Collazo, but Froch had a Dirrell also. I thought Dirrell, as horrendously as possible, edged that one.

2. I can certainly understand that. And it was adjustment at a high enough level (I still have much respect for Bute). But I do think about Hatton, while at a lower level, I'd say, completely and successfully altering his style against Malignaggi. That was really a very, very nice performance from a different type of fight than what he ordinarily applied. Again, of course Malignaggi wasn't at a Bute level, and he was also fighting strange for Malignaggi, but I quite liked what Hatton did there in a change-up. Solid coaching/training job from Senior, there. But Hatton really carried the style out with great efficiency.

 

Hatton's best boxing performance was Tackie probably.

Hatton has the much quicker feet.