Before Hatton V Mayweather

Yeah deffo.

I think he was in it for a while afterwards as well, before slipping away.

 

Are you sure they've updated the ratings since saturday?

 

Hatton was #6 on Ring Mag, #6 on BBC, #3 on Sky and #4 on Boxrec - I had him at 7

BBC still have him at #9, I have him #10.

 

I think Hatton was something like number 5 after beating Zoo who was 3 and the JLC who was number 7. He lost to the number 1 and was dropped from the top 10 the very next month.

To just drop him from the top ten completely for losing to the number 1 when moving up in weight was very harsh IMHO.

It'll be interesting to see what happens if Pac (P4P #1) gets demolished by Oscar (not even in the top ten).....

 

No way will they drop Pac out of the top-10 if he loses; I doubt he'll drop outside the top 3 (depending on the manner of the defeat he could well remain No.1).

I know what you are saying though; it is one rule for one and one rule for another.

 

I know they won't drop him out of the top 10 but any drop will be highly debated. I had a discussion with some Pac fans on the GF and while they think Pac will lose they will not even entertain the possibility of him losing his number 1 spot because of it.

 

Yeah it's fairly ridiculous double standards. Cotto, for example, is still in there at ten. Hatton had beaten fighters who The Ring rated much higher than anyone Cotto beat, and only lost to a fighter that The Ring ranked much higher than the fighter Cotto lost to.

 

The Collazo and Urango shockers may have had some bearing.....

 

We can argue about the merits of Maussa, Urango (which is looking like it might turn out to be an underated win) etc all day but the fact is going into the JLC fight Hatton was number 5 and JLC was 7, Hatton KO's JLC and then loses to the number 1 and gets dropped from the top 10? Theres no logic there whatsoever.

 

(1) Didn't say he wasn't.

(2) I agree.

(3) I agree.

As GazOC could tell ya: I hate Hatton.

Doesn't change the fact that he lost to the P-4-P no.1 and was dropped like a hot-one down the ratings. Mayweather didn't "Pavlik" Hatton; it wasn't a non-stop beating from start to finish (just in the last few rounds).

If De la Hoya beats Pac silly, his fall down the ratings will be nowhere near as dramatic. Of course his past performances have to be taken into account, but so should Hatton's (despite them being nowhere near as good). The fact remains that I do not believe that Hatton should have disappeared from the ratings with his one loss.

 

It's like the blind leading the blind in here. "OH why did Hatton drop out of the top 10...I don't know ... I don't know either thats so harsh :|"

I know this is the Brit forum but lets not play fools. Hatton had been performing like crap since Tszyu. His fights were boring and unimpressive and in the main against uninspiring competition.

You can't live off one win forever. Once you got your place you've got to earn the right to keep it and Hatton never did so. Therefore it was a pretty easy decision to drop him once he lost, he didn't make it difficult for ring magazine.

Now...if he gets a couple of impressive wins together he may earn a spot again. Malignaggi and then maybe Pacquiao/Bradley in IMPRESSIVE fashion and it would be fair for him to reappear.

 

I still have him as a top 10 Brit p4p but no where near on the world stage. He was in the top 10 after his Kostya win but has been no where near ever since. His humiliation against PBF made certain his name should never be entertained on the lists.