10 year anniversary of the best win of the 2000's. Floyd Mayweather, Jr (38-0) vs Ricky Hatton 43-0

It was the last big time relevant win that Floyd had over a big name opponent who was either not yet shot or very tiny. MVC always brings it up because it was the last time Mayweather wasn't seen as a cherrypicking bore.

Well besides the Canelo fight which at 152 pounds seemed a little farce since the guy could barely even make 155 let alone 152.

 

I would take Hatton over all those guys except Pacquiao at that time. Margarito was overrated. Williams didn't hit hard enough or have a rough style that gives Floyd problems. Cotto was never elite IMO.

 

Hatton was a pressure fighter who loved to get rough and rugged. How's that going to work exactly were he to fight Williams or Margarito? Both much tougher, and rugged than Hatton?

 

I thought we were talking about Floyd vs OTHER? I was talking about Floyd vs any of those fighters.

 

Well, I'd give Floyd the credit for knocking the last of Mosley's prime out of him, considering the performance that Shane turned in less than 18 months before against Margarito.

Mayweather made it look like Shane had next to zero stamina. You know how Wladimir punched more against Joshua than he did against Fury and the lay observers thought he was a different guy? Sometimes you just have to give credit when a man makes another (usually capable) man look like a useless pile of crap. Mayweather-Mosley is not the first or last instance of a guy going from killer to helpless child over the course of two fights.

Shane threw a combination while Floyd was on the ropes with his guard up, intelligently going to the body first to set up a right hand that whistled by Mayweather's chin. But Floyd isn't Adrian Stone or Antonio Margarito, men whom Mosley finished off with equal aplomb, dynamism and proficiency eight years apart - maybe that has something to do with it? Buzzing the greatest defender in a generation doesn't mean game over, even for a dynamic attacker like Shane.

His speed was still very much in evidence when he caught Floyd with the two right hands in the middle minute of that round. And his combination punching ability was certainly intact one fight prior to meeting Mayweather.

Fair enough. You did endorse another guy's post that compared the two, but I'll assume you were focusing on another section of his statement.

I just think it's a little disingenuous to present that as the defining image of Hatton, when we know he'd already beaten a string of legitimate 140lb contenders who were much more capable of doing business at that weight than an inactive Lazcano.

Ricky himself has testified that the defeat to Floyd, on top of a string of attritional fights he'd had leading up to their meeting, knocked a lot out of him.

The point is, it's an odd and unfair comparison.

So Ricky, a trade infighter with the range of a tyrannosaurus rex, took a few good hits from Juan Lazcano and got shook up a bit. What about it? All that did was show that his ability to take a punch was deteriorating post-Mayweather. It's not as if Ricky had never proved himself in better company than a blown-up, inactive Lazcano.

Well, if you're asking for my opinion on that;

Old Shane is the sparklier name, but I think prime, undefeated Hatton adds more credit to Floyd's résumé. That isn't tantamount to saying that Hatton beats Old Shane H2H, just that he was more of a handful, brought more intensity, gave Floyd more to deal with.

The style and physical dimensions and the intensity of Margarito, I believe, add up to the most exhausting fight of Floyd's career. I'd rate a win over prime Tony over the wins over Hatton and Old Shane, even though Old Shane beat Tony resoundingly. Due to Margarito's particular style, I think he would have been more of a boon to Floyd's résumé than Old Shane.

By the same token, Paul Williams beat Tony by being quicker out of the gate and building a lead, but I'd still see a win over prime Margarito as more of a jewel in Floyd's crown than a win over Williams. As for Hatton, what exactly makes his scalp so much less desirable than that of Williams? Paul wasn't a trade infighter or a trade counterpuncher or a pure boxer. He was an oddball lefty who was big, threw a lot of punches and got the benefit of the doubt in a couple fights he probably should've lost, but he wasn't adept in any particular area of boxing. Hatton was believed by many pundits to be a threat to Mayweather due to styles. Not that Mayweather couldn't handle him necessarily, but that he'd have to dig into his toolkit and bring out some stuff that we didn't often see from him. And that's what transpired. Against Hatton, Mayweather drew on skills that he didn't have to make use of from one fight to the next. Would Paul Williams demand that of Mayweather? I don't think so. I like prime Ricky here.

Manny? Well, Manny's an ATG. Of course his scalp has greater value to a résumé than Hatton's.

Cotto at welterweight would be a very good win for Floyd, too. Between him and Hatton, I think it's arguable. Both bring value to a résumé, both were P4P fixtures for a good while, both will end up in the HOF (for what that's worth), although I don't mind anybody giving Cotto an edge. He brings the four-weight cache, after all, although his career above 147 is somewhat deceptive. H2H, Hatton and Cotto would've been a great fight at 140 (heck, even at 147).


I don't know why it's so hard to acknowledge that Hatton could fight, was a problem, and that beating him in his undefeated, prime state is a very good win for Mayweather. It's not as if Floyd was a big welter, so the limit of poundage that he and Ricky fought at shouldn't be held against him.

 

dude Hatton barely scraped by Collazo.

 

that win is not even top 10

 

Again I'm referring to the fighters vs Mayweather not versus each other.

 

I remember that Hatton was cheated by the referee, Cortez..................Cortez would not allow Hatton to fight on the inside at all, remember that? Vegas is corrupt as hell...................

 

not the side i'm on, but gotta admit i'm definitely intrigued by the Horny Rigo

 

i had forgotten about Collazo v Hatton until now.

you're absolutely right though

The scoring was very close (though a UD); i saw Collazo as the winner because i scored the last round 10-8 given Collazo's far higher output and the fact that Hatton was hurt and wobbled.

 

That was a very close fight................Collazo did well................but that does still not make an excuse for Cortez..........