Who has the better resume right now, Hatton or Haye?

I disagree mate. They obviously arn't highpoints, Hatton got beaten but the fact that Hatton has lost to fighters that are far and away better than any of those that Haye has fought doesn't mean they are downpoints in this comparison either.

 

Personally - and for the fact it was on foreign soil, at a new weight - I'd have to say Collazo, but obviously that is moot for a lot of people on account of the finish. You could make an argument for Paulie - certainly The Ring acknowledged his legitimacy as an opponent at the time - but personally I'd say even a faded Castillo presented a greater challenge. It's certainly fair to say Tzsyu was a long way ahead of anybody else on Hatton's resume. I do take issue with the attempts over the years to devalue that victory, although I'm of course aware that this is very old ground. The Tzsyu victory, in my opinion though, places Hatton beyond Haye as things stand, and I'd be genuinely surprised if Haye surpasses it.

 

Manner of loss doesn't count for anything?

Sure, if he had have matched Mayweather like a prime Castillo or matched Pac like a prime Marquez. But two KO defeats? One early? That has to play a part.:think

And I'm not talking in the Haye comparison either, because Hatton is handily in the lead with the Tszyu win. I'm just talking generally.

This might be a subject for a different thread, all of its own.

 

What are we talking, Haye or generally? In your last post you said "in this comparison" which I took to mean Haye?

If its Haye in my book Hatton losing to Mayweather and Pac doesn't impact negatively in any way if you are comparing the two fighters records because Haye hasn't fought anyone who was anywhere near the level of Pac and Mayweather.

If its generally then both men scored vicorties over Hatton that were easier/ quicker than they were used to scoring over other opponents around that time. How much of that is just a style issue though? Pac KO'd Hatton a lot quicker than he KO'd Diaz, does that mean Diaz would have beaten Hatton? I'd guess at elite level Hatton has one way of winning, if that doesn't work then he's getting KO'd rather than muddling through to a points decision loss.

 

It's such bollocks when people champion him fighting Pacquiao and Mayweather. It hardly takes balls of steel in boxing terms, every pro out there would love to make the kind of money he did in those fights even if they lost and I dare say the average man on his street would take his lumps for that. Basically thats what Hatton did, carefully built his rep precisely so he could demand those fights.

As for his actual performances about 70 people have done something similar, a vasty majority in the Pacquiao case would have actually done a damn sight better than he did also.

 

Ah, the pissheads "I'd fight Tyson and go down in a round for £5 million" claim. The fact you have to work for years to earn that opportunity seems to escape them.

Poor.

 

I'm saying that Hatton's losses to Pac and Mayweather don't make a difference in comparison to Haye, that Hatton is so far ahead of Haye at the moment that they don't really matter.

But should Haye draw closer to Hatton, then they shouldn't be counted as plus points for Hatton in an argument such as this, but instead reflect badly on his overall status because he lost both fights (one of them badly).

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t9SCHLRDoY[/ame]

 

Hatton...

 

We're talking about a supposedly top level fighter here, yet people bang on about how miraculous it was to step into the ring with great fighters. Bollocks, history is littered with people that have 'challenged' great fighters...it doesn't really add to their overall legacy as fighters unless they did something in the fight to warrant it. Not neccessarily win even, just put up a decent display is sometimes enough to come out of those fights with your reputation enhanced but for Hatton that wasn't the case. Beat at his own game by Mayweather but worse than that knocked out by a man that doesn't look like knocking anybody out at the moment, and Pacquiao, less said the better about that brainless effort.

 

Do you really think it was that calculated, though? My own feeling - particularly with the Mayweather fight - was that Hatton bought into the hype every bit as much as his fans. I don't think he went in there as the consummation of a business plan - I think he thought he'd beat him. He's been on a spiral ever since, which tends to point towards the unravelling of an ego which had been carefully - and of course professionally - built by Frank Warren. As I said earlier, what price do you place on your own peace of mind?

 

no doubt hatton

 

Yep, they arn't plus points, he lost badly. Thats why I can't understand that problem with rating Hattons career, he has decent world class wins and lost when he fought the elite.

Its a career thats a complete piece of **** to sum up yet some people seem determined to pull the record apart using a "logic" that they don't seem to apply to other British boxers in similar situations.

 

I'm not saying its added to Hattons legacy. He was a decent world champ with 5/6 defences who got well beaten by 2 ATGs.

****ing awful fighter eh?

 

I'm sure he believed he could win, delusion is at the forefront of many a boxers psyche. It almost has to be, for a top fighter.

But the point many are making is he never took too many risks post-Tszyu. Once he'd 'made it' he was fairly happy cashing in, just as he did in the WBU days. If Bradley was around back then I get the impression Hatton would have never fought him for example.

Haye is doing something very similar at heavyweight right now, though he's taking it to extremes with Harrison.