The answer: You can belittle literally any fighter's resume to be a dick. It's not difficult at all. It's much more difficult to understand what their opponents brought to the table than to be dismissive of them.
No mate. that post will be my only contribution to this thread. the use of the word resume is a far bigger cancer on the sport than a few people under rating Hatton.
I'm still waiting for someone to dig up a post from anyone other than Buncey criticising Carl's choice of opposition.....
Froch is one of the most overated british fighters of all time, hatton was a much better all round fighter,and froch has beat some very overated fighters and gets more credit than he derserves for that.
You know what I like when assessing a fighters career...I'll give you a clue though, it ain't those who are saying similar things to you :good
Hindsight is great isn't it! What did Larry Holmes ever do? Barely beat an aging Norton. Beat an over rated Cooney in a life and death fight. Get exposed twice by a light heavyweight. Arguably lost to novice Witherspoon as well as being pushed to the limit by guys who history won't remember. Ricky Hatton beat a top 10 140 pounder, the number 2 or 3 p4p in the world. He beat a top 30 lightweight (historically this is very impressive). He was a 2 weight champ and beat a much bigger fighter in Collazo. Not to mention that wins over titlists like Malignaggi, Maussa and Urango must garner respect. Much better than beating no name contenders.
He didn't do that badly against Mayweather at first, and while no way was Hatton ever winning that fight, lets be honest, Joe Cortez ****ed him over a little