If Hatton wins vs Pac, will you rank him ahead of Calzaghe in P4P rank?

If he gets beat by a lww, it is tempered by the fact he has only fought at a weight equal to or higher than that weight once, while he was facing someone whose natural weight is that division, who has spent the majority of his career there and a fair bit at the division above. If he gets beat then he gets beat, fair and square, but a former flyweight who looked small at light fighting a natural strong lww isn't the same as just losing to someone more akin to his own natural size. Losing to Hatton is not as bad for Pacquiao as losing to Edwin Valero or Nate Campbell would be. I said at the time and I still say that Hatton's loss vs Mayweather was tempered by the fact that we saw against Collazo that Hatton was not comfortable at 147.

 

Two of Pac's losses were a decade ago, one was against an ATG over 3 years ago. If you knew anything about how the p4p rankings were worked out, you would know that his losses ceased to have any relevance a long time ago, hence my last post to you.

 

I don't know whats up with you guys ... but if Hatton beats Pacquiao ... he's number 1 all the way. His only loss came to the former p4p champion (PBF) and Pac already beat JMM ... Calzaghe hasn't fought the quality of opposition that Hatton did.

1. Hatton p4p champion

last 6 fights:
W TKO Malignaggi (IBO/Ring magazine title)
W UD Lazcano (IBO/Ring magazine title)
L KO by Mayweather (WBC welterweight title)
W TKO Castillo (IBF title)
W UD Urango (IBF title)
W UD Collazo (WBA welterweight title)

 

Laughable

 

You don't know how the p4p rankings are worked out, simple as that. It's pointless talking about this with you, as you don't know what you're talking about.

 

..

 

Is a KO loss to Mayweather, a points win over Lazcano and a stoppage against Malignaggi as good as a razor-thin and possibly wrong points loss to Pacquiao, a KO win over Casamayor to win a world title at a 3rd weight division and wide UD's over Rocky Juarez and Marco Antonio Barrera?

 

I'm trying not to be rude, but your knowledge of boxing is shocking going by this thread.

 

Hatton is a lot better at 147 than either he or his fanboys give him credit for.

 

Hattons wins at 147 were not given the credit they deserved Collazo,Urango the KO was the icing on the cake

 

Pac has only fought 2 fights in his entire career above Super Featherweight.

2 out of something like 56 fights.

and only 1 of those 2 fights has been above the lightweight limit.

10 months ago, Pac fought at 130 lbs.

 

Urango was at 140. Hatton is 1-1 at 147.

 

No we probably won't, considering he is 30 years old and has fought his way up through fly, superbantam, feather, superfeather and light, and now sees the big money fights at lww and ww. But how does that mean he is a legitimate lww? He isn't, he is a lower weight fighter who is fighting there for glory and money, and he may just be good enough to pull it off. Height isn't the only barometer for who can fight at what weight. Alexis Arguello was one of the best SUPERFEATHERWEIGHTS ever and Mike Tyson was one of the best HEAVYWEIGHTS ever - same height. You see what you can do with a bit of knowledge?? Learn your past son, and the present will follow.

 

PBF KO......sent him packing out of the division, thanks
I didn't know Urango was 140 btw

 

So what? He is not a natural lww, simple as that. He was fighting at superfeather less than a year ago. That you would downplay Ricky Hatton's loss at 147 because of his size when he has never fought below 140 and has fought the vast majority of his career at 140, but you would not downplay Pacquiao losing at 140 when he was fighting at 130 a year ago, and spent the majority of his career 122-130 absolutely reeks of bias and a dire lack of knowledge of this sport.

Paul Williams is 6ft 1in, David Tua is 5ft 10in - height is not important in peoples' natural weights.