Does Ricky Hatton deserve to be in the hall of fame?

For any potential inductee it's as much about the "deserving" candidates yet to be enshrined as it is about the "undeserving" fighters already inducted. Gatti is no more of a measuring stick than Pone Kingpetch or Eddie Booker.

Hatton's achievements include a career-defining win against a legit world champ who is arguably top 5 at 140, in addition to beating future HOF Castillo and titlists Malignaggi, Urango, Collazo and Maussa. It's a pretty solid resume.

The main knocks are that the best names he beat (Tsyzu and Castillo) were past their prime, and he was decisively beaten by the two best fighters he faced.

The deciding factor how far gone Tszyu and Castillo were. Personally I think Tszyu still had plenty left and far from a shot fighter, but that Hatton was inspired that night. On that basis Hatton probably deserves a spot in the Hall.

 

Agreed. I think a prime version of Kosta would struggle with a prime hatton he just didn't like that mauling non stop pressure style.

It is called the hall of fame though and some of less deserving names someone possibly like Gatti who wasn't an elite level fighter had big followings. I mean he sadly passed away a few years ago and people are still here talking about him. So he did something right

 

2005 fighter of the year has to make it into the hall of fame.

 

The 1999 and 2004 FOTY are unlikely to make it, and 2002 may not either.

 

Why do people so often fail to see the relevance of the title here

Hall of FAME

Not 'Hall of ATG's'

 

THis never ending argument. Hatton was a P4P top ten fighter for 5 years non-stop. FOTY. 2 weight champion. Its a no-brainer. Even on his 'worst' day he trashed Malignaggi like no other fighter did.

 

I think some forget this is a Hall of 'FAME', not 'greatness'; thus Hatton should be in sooner or later.

 

The sole criteria for induction are the fighter's achievements in the ring as a professional. The "Fame" element is a misnomer, and predates the modern meaning of the term.

In other words, it is (supposed to be) a "Hall of Greatness", not a "Hall of Most Well Known".

 

Exactly, if a fighter has achieved fame, they will enter, as it is clear the Business model relies on a big financial weekend for the induction ceremony.

If this achieved, token calls can then be made. Hatton has shown the American market in the Lil Floyd and Pacquiao fights, he can get a crowd over the pond.

 

No because as a boxer he didn't even know how to move his head or any other defensive class. As roger said he just a club fighter. Only thing he had was a good body punch and a sense of humour. Only class guy he beat was tsyu and that was against an old tsyu and ricky only just about beat him after taking numerous big shots in his face. When he beat castillo he wasn't really up for it as he was getting no money for the figut and tbh ricky did have a decent body punch. In america against the same castillo mayweather fought ricky would have surely lost. Went far considering his lack of boxing skill. Fair played Ricky.

 

Great Post.

My own opinion is yes the vast majority of considerations on this issue is achievements in the ring and quality of opponents, it has to be.

However, I also think an element of consideration whether a fighter is a hall of famer is what he brings to the sport.

Hatton brought an aawful lot with regards to how people warmed to him, what other boxer can drag 20,000 fans half way across the world to watch him fight. When he was at his peak Hatton had people who werent boxing fans turning on their TV screens and that has to be good news for boxing!!!

Overall, I think Hatton deserves his place.

 

Got to be retired 5 yrs, so he's a bit to go, but yes he should be.

 

Yes, 100%

 

Just rewatched the tszyu. What a great night that was for Ricky, got to be his best performance against not a prime Tszyu but a very good one.

Although when you watch it again, you do realise why he was badly exposed against the elite. He is so easy to hit