24 yr old Hatton vs 24 yr old Khan who do you have?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by rayrobinson, Jul 21, 2011.


  1. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    :thumbsup This
     
  2. Post Box

    Post Box I'm back too, bitches Full Member

    14,484
    3
    Oct 12, 2010
    Pretty much agree with all of this
     
  3. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    Hatton requires Micky Vann to win. Vann must have refereed about 10 of his bouts. I remember when he fought Eamon Magee. The fight was nearly scuppered because Magee didn't want Vann as the ref. Vann was brought in deliberately by SN to ref all of Hatton's fight's. Naturally Vann always did a great job for the "home" fighter.
     
  4. antonio8904

    antonio8904 Atheist Full Member

    6,138
    1
    Oct 19, 2008
    this...^

    Hatton had underrated skills. Unfortunately he was his own worst enemy. Had he taken care of himself he'd still be fighting today and doing well at 140.
     
  5. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    This is just soooo tiresome and cliche. Underrated compared to what? He spent a huge chunk of his career fighting WBU tin cans. Was that underrated too?
     
  6. Post Box

    Post Box I'm back too, bitches Full Member

    14,484
    3
    Oct 12, 2010
    Hatton is listed as 5'7 and Khan as 5'10, where did you get them stats from?
     
  7. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    Hatton never dealt well with fast box punchers. Khan isn't a puncher but he has respectable power. And certainly the reach jab and hand speed to deal with Hatton handily.
     
  8. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    If you want to be really pedantic you'll find he is closer to 5ft 6 - Hatton.
     
  9. Aznhybrid

    Aznhybrid Active Member Full Member

    632
    0
    Jun 20, 2009
    Khan. Too fast, and with roach in his corned would cruise to a decision.
     
  10. scot

    scot New Member Full Member

    56
    0
    Apr 19, 2008
    hatton ko, pretty much 100%.
     
  11. rayrobinson

    rayrobinson Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,656
    706
    Dec 8, 2009
    Ive stood next to both Khan and Hatton and neither are the heights they say they are.

    I dont know if this makes a difference , but when shaking Hatton and Khans hands I noticed that Khan is really quite a small frame , very skinny legs , where as Hatton was just a solid looking fella.
     
  12. scurlaruntings

    scurlaruntings ESB 2002 Club Full Member

    35,621
    12
    Jul 19, 2004
    Hatton's always been a sturdy chap. If you ask me Khan should be back down at 135. Although his performed much better at 140.
     
  13. ploys

    ploys New Member Full Member

    1
    0
    Mar 5, 2011
    there was nothing wrong with vann in that fight. the only fight that vann reffed hatton that was dodgy was the smith fight iirc...& even then; your trainer can't just storm the ring...

    at the same time vann was a massive twat. what kind of referee has himself announced as "superstar referee micky vann". twat.
     
  14. Timothy

    Timothy Active Member Full Member

    1,152
    0
    May 16, 2011
  15. diamondDave

    diamondDave Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,264
    11
    Jul 21, 2004
    I will go with Hatton based on his greater aggression and body punching.

    Hatton UD12 Khan