Hatton 'cheated', but Holyfield and Hopkins never did!

I'd have to watch through his entire career for any sneaky ones he got away with. We all know you can cheat without neccessarily being caught having seen Hopkins career....

Certainly in boxing its difficult because emotions run high when a guy is punching you in the face. Instincts come into it at times, its not a premeditated decision all of the time.

 

are you serious? ..holyfield hit dokes with a head butt and a low blow at the same ****ing time!!! not as blatant! my ass

 

If I were Cameroonian, I might be inclined to point you in the direction of some very nifty (and cynical) diving by the jug-eared tosser on a warm July night in Naples circa 1990.

But I'm not so I'll let it slide.

 

Different ballgame dude.....Hopkins and Holyfield are cagey boxers, Hatton's been a wrestler his entire career.

 

Holyfield used to be good at hiding the headbutt behind a right hand the way Hopkins does but it became more obvious the older he got. Hopkins is a dirty fighter but at lest he tries to cover it up, he fouls on the blind side of the referee. Hatton woould just do whatever he wanted without any fear of reprisal whatsoever. As an example, if you're a referee and one guy grabs the other guy-both arms, sticks his head in his face, walks him to the ropes and mauls him, would you shout "stop" or "break" or would you say "let 'im go Ricky" and then do nothing at all when he ignored you and wait until he signalled you that he wanted to break?

 

in translation ...american boxers do it and it's ok because they "hide it" ...even though it's there for the whole world to see

 

Holyfield and Hopkins cheated more than hatton.

 

No, in translation, there's a difference between fouling, which all boxers do at one time or antother and being able to do whatever the hell you like because the ref is in your promotor's pocket. Hatton's a much dirtier fighter than either Hopkins or Holyfield, Hatton's entire style is dirty fighting.

 

Utter bull****. Carry on though, I have no stake in this argument..

 

Can't say I disagree with this but a ref is not getting hit in the face and is supposed to be unbiased. Again the main criticism in the Hatton vs Tzyu fight is that the ref gave Hatton Carte Blanche to do whatever he wanted.

 

I like Hatton but he was allowed to get away with murder by his good mates Micky Vann and Dave Paris during his WBU days at the MEN, holding, mauling, rabbit punching, low blows, you name it Hatton was pretty much allowed to do it with impunity. Which is why it makes me laugh when people get all whiney about Cortez in the Mayweather fight for not allowing Hatton to basically cheat like Vann and Paris had done in the past. Yes, Cortez was on Hatton's case but wrestling someone against the ropes and then holding and repeatedly hitting them (one of Hatton's main traits) is not allowed in boxing.

 

Why are you commenting then, if you want to prove me wrong in saying Hatton's a dirty fighter then go ahead.

 

all i can say is that low blow on zoo? ...priceless!

 

:think

 

I don't have a problem with how he handled Mayweather-Hatton. The problem I had with Cortez was having two sets of standards for two big fights pretty close together. He reffed Hopkins-Calzaghe a completely different way, which made for a shitty viewing experience that should've been alot better than it was considering two top 5 P4P fighters were involved.