I’m not aware that Hatton is held in high regard on here Mark. I’ve never known him win a head to head! I think most on here know his level and how good he was or wasn’t.
I’d put him more on McClellan’s level. Both knocked out aging champions that they outweighed by 20 pounds (or was it 40?) on fight night. Then they got beaten into retirement when they faced the elites.
Given that Hatton was a huge underdog, I’d say yes. You do need hindsight. Particularly when you give the huge underdog hardly any credit for dominating and stopping the champion.
Hatton could’ve easily been DQ’d vs Tszyu, Collazo, Urango etc for persistent holding alone. That was his game - jump in and grab hold, or catch shots with his face when he didn’t.
Tszyu hadn't lost for years prior to that so he was up there the whole time and the Hatton beat him and took his place
I think the p4p concept loses its meaning when people treat it like a ranking system where you take the position of the person you beat. That is fundamentally flawed, as the whole idea is ranking fighters who will never actually fight each other. All p4p ever can be is a subjective snapshot of who you think the best fighters are if you pretend they are all the same size. There is a context to all of this, and Hatton’s stock was higher after beating Tszyu than it would be with the passage of time. Notwithstanding that though, it’s still difficult to see how he could have been rated over the Pacs and JMMs of this world.
I think this is because of timing and the generally accepted perception of Hatton having peaked in 2005, with his performance against Tszyu. I suspect Hatton peaked years earlier and that the Tszyu win, whilst by no means a fluke, was that exceptional, one-off effort that Hatton was still able to muster in the biggest fight of his life, to force the win. Sure - At this stage, he deserved the FOTY award and to be considered one of the top Pound-4-Pound fighters in the world. This was the point at which people were wanting to see Hatton and Mayweather fight at 140. However, if Hatton was on a continued decline, post-Tszyu (and I think he was - not to mention that I reckon the Tszyu fight had left its mark on Hatton), it was rather unfortunate that he now found himself on the world stage, with expectations from him being greater than ever before. The accolades he received in 2005 only served to shroud the reality of Hatton's situation, but on the flipside of that same coin, also served to secure his financial future. Hatton was never able to replicate his 2005 levels of performance. Quite oppositely, his form began to look a little shaky - not so much against Maussa (albeit, that Hatton was reckless and a little ragged), but most certainly against Collazo and Urango. I can certainly remember having conversations about whether or not Hatton was still the real McCoy, after the Urango bout. But then along came the Castillo match - a bout, which flattered to deceive and was, to my mind, purely to cement (maybe even rescue) the Hatton/Mayweather bout. Hatton's TKO loss to Mayweather kind of sealed it for those on the fence. He had become all about the money, post-Tszyu. I don't blame him for that, but it led to a massive amount of hype, which many fans fell for and then wondered what the hell had happened.
I agree with the sentiments of your points about Pound-for-Pound listings being treated like a regimented ranking system. One of the things that turned a lot of people off Hatton was his incessant reference to becoming the Pound-for-Pound Champion were he to beat Mayweather. To a great extent Pound-for-Pound ratings have become a sham concept, used to promoted fights with empty talking points. On Hatton being assessed as better Pound-for-Pound, than Pacquiao and Marquez, I think this was only for a brief period, 2005/06. Pacquiao and Marquez hadn't really set the world alight as they would later do. Pacquiao actually lost to Morales in 2005 and was still ranked higher than Morales; no doubt based on his win over Barrera (2003) and Draw with Marquez (2004). Marquez would lose to Chris John in 2006 and be relegated. Perhaps the above speaks to your original point.
Good post, and thanks for the reminder of the context at the time. To be fair, Hatton in the top five probably had a rationale in terms of wins, but for P4P I tend to apply the eye test more than who beat who. Yeah, Hatton’s constant pushing of the P4P “title” angle was irritating. It’s an absurd notion that such a title can be “defended” in the ring, which completely undermines the concept of rating across divisions in the first place. P4P should really just be a bit of fun, a drunken bar-room what if conversation.
Not all fights fall neatly into either category, but I see Hatton-Tszyu as more “stars aligning” than “changing of the guard”. Not a fluke by any stretch, but definitely right place right time.
