Before Hatton V Mayweather

No ones whining, its a valid question IMHO. Its not just about one fight, explain being number 5, beating the number 7 impressively and then losing to the number 1 and not being in the top 10?


(Without childish emoticons if possible)

 

I award myself 1 smiley per post. Your favourite is the yellow smirk smiley I've noticed, as if to indicate a less serious tone to your post.

If Hatton had actually done something that didn't send Ring Magazine editors to sleep between Tszyu and Mayweather it would have been more difficult. I think they were quite patient really, they obviously said to themselves they'll stick by him since it wouldn't be credible to drop him while he's at least winning. But then he got comprehensively outclassed as no top 10 fighter should, and it was all too easy to drop him on recent performances.

They dropped a shitter with Castillo as it undermines them seriously. No sensible person had him anywhere near a list when he couldn't even make weight on numerous occasions and went life and death with Herman Ngoudjo. Imagine having Joan Guzman on a p4p list right now.

 

Its a "wink" not a "smirk" actually and I use it when a post can look a bit harsh in print but isn't meant with any malice.

I've no problem with people saying the rankings were flawed, that Hatton shouldn't have been number 5, that JLC shouldn't have been 7 or whatever but given the rankings were what they were what happened to Hatton was a joke and reflected pretty poorly on the rankings and how they are compiled (as you know, I'm not a big fan of P4P lists in the first place).

 

You could have done with a wink smiley here. It looked quite harsh on print, I am quite sensitive to this, it almost looks a different meaning with a smiley attatched.

Yep, I have to agree with that. There can't be much credibility or thought behind them at times. No matter which way I try to spin it if one guy beats the supposed number 7 easily he shouldn't be dropped so quickly after one defeat.

But there is no point in making the same mistake twice by keeping Hatton because they ****ed up on rating Castillo. Then if Malignaggi beat Hatton he'd be a lock for top 10 which would suck.

 

I know, sorry. But I'd already posted it and I don't think you can edit smilies back in to a post??

 

TBH I think the **** up came beating Zoo at number 3 and installing Hatton at 5 on the back of that. That win should have got Hatton in at 8 or 9, the JLC win should have cemented it or maybe moved him up a place and the Mayweather loss have no effect or maybe one place back down.

The way the Ring did it every step in that chain of moves was too harsh, first one way, then the other.

 

The Ring like a good knee jerk though.

I think you are correct. I don't think I would have shed a tear if Hatton hadn't been installed as high as 5 originally

 

This is my main problem with P4P lists, the sheer reactionary nature of them. Fighters get catapulted into the consensus top ten with one good result (strangely enough by a lot of the same kind of people who parrot the 'styles make fights' line in a lot of other situations) but everyone refuses to go back and review the situation in view of further evidence.

For example, Jermaine Taylor beats Bernard Hopkins and everyone puts him in their top ten P4P. And once he's there, apparantly he stays there until he loses, even though his next few fights demonstrated that Taylor was not really at that high a level.

Then Taylor loses to Pavlik, and everyone puts Pavlik in the top ten because he beat Taylor who was 'top ten P4P'. Then they put Taylor down in the twenties! If Taylor had really been a P4P top ten fighter before the Pavlik fight, of course, there's no reason why he would not still have been afterwards, all he did was lose a fight.

That kind of reactionary approach just locks in the bad calls and leads to circle jerks forming.

Another example: Margarito beats Cotto and suddenly everyone has to have Margarito in their top tens (can't really recall how Cotto got there, maybe just through having his name endlessly linked to Mayweather...). But nobody has Williams in the top ten, despite him beating Margarito just 12 months previously because Margarito 'wasn't P4P when Williams beat him'.

WTF is that? Does anyone seriously think that the 30 year old, 34 fight veteran Margarito had a career transformation over the course of those 12 months. Did he reinvent himself and radically improve? Of course not, he's the same fighter he always was, he just found himself a hyped fighter he could beat.

 

Agreed with pretty much every word of that Cobbler. I've never been a fan of this thinking whereby anyone who beats a pound for pounder automatically becomes a pound for pounder themselves. Too often it's just a case of a fighter happening to stumble on an opponent who is a good stylistic match for him. Even though I'm a big fan of his, I was never convinced by sticking Hatton straight into the ratings after his win over Tszyu (though having done so, it makes no sense to drop him completely for losing a fight the the p4p #1 at his weight in his country for his belt with his ref).

I think there have been too many guys stuck straight in there off of a win over one p4p rated guy when their subsequent results showed they had no business being there. Junior Jones (after Barrera), Vernon Forrest (after Mosley), Ricardo Mayorga (after Forrest) spring to mind. Pavlik could be another one, remains to be seen though I'm certainly not about to do a general forum trick and label him "exposed" or "shot" after one loss! I prefer my pound for pounders to be guys who have proven themselves over time against a wide range of high quality fighters and styles rather than one hit wonders. Hence my preference for Pac, JMM, Calzaghe, B-Hop and Israel Vazquez as a top 5.

I agree entirely re: the Margo comment.

 

That guy Margarito can't box. Never a top 10 fighter in a million years.

 

The Ring haven't updated there p4p rankings still. They should do by tomorrow so. Also, if I remember correctly, Hatton wasn't dropped from the top 10 straight after the Mayweather loss, he stayed for a few months until other fighters had good performances and Hatton was forced out of the list.

IMO, Pavlik should definitely drop out of the top 10 now. Have no idea how he was rated as high as 7 in the first place. Should have been no higher than 9 or 10.

 

No mate, he was straight out at the next update. I was looking out for it as I thought it was interesting what they'd do with Hatton after the Mayweather loss.

 

I stand corrected :good

 

Hatton shut out Maussa, Urango and Lazcano. He didn't look great doing it but honestly when has Hatton not looked sloppy. He had one genuinely tough fight v Collazo at a new weight for a title. Maussa was awkward but got sparked. Urango was trouble but he was ill and shut him out. Lazcano is a decent contender and got dominated.

I think it's psychology. Hatton was being groomed for the Mayweather fight but it was designed as the be and end all of him. Hatton did this to himself by suggesting he'd retire. Even when he lost it doesn't appear that the big fights are in him. Lazcano and Malignaggi are big box office but not big fights. For this reason people don't believe Hatton will really be a fixture again.

Despite all this, Hatton should be a top p4pr.

 

yes he was, i think ring magazine had him 5/6th i had him at 6 myself