Someone mentioned on another thread that Hatton and Pazienza were inferior fighters, but I pointed out that Hatton was far better, at Hatton`s peak weight of 140, Pazienza was awful and was outboxed by a fading Camacho who I feel Hatton would have destroyed, am I overstating here or am I making any sense at all?
Hatton! But I am a big Hatton fan, and feel he is underrated....by consequence I perhaps overrate him myself... But I don’t think bias is necessary to say Hatton is both greater over all as well as better h2h at 140 imo
I think Hatton wins decisively. I rooted against him in every single fight of his I watched, beginning around the Ben Tackie fight, and I don't think I've every hated a fighter more passionately. But now I'd like to think I've matured and I view boxing in a way that I appreciate the art/sport without taking a personal side against any particular fighters. Now I understand that Ricky was an excellent champion and I hope he has a good, well earned retirement. Anyhow, Ricky was clearly 1 or 2 levels than Paz ever was. Nothing against Vinnie, was he was really, really limited and basically got a lot of breaks (YIKES!, no pun intended) because of his personality and marketability.
Hatton He was legitimate champ at that weight. Paz did nothing at 140 lbs but lose a comprehensive decision to Roger Mayweather
Yeah, you're overstating things a little bit...Hatton wasn't going to "destroy" any version of Camacho.
Might depend on whether he can negotiate the mammoth ring size like he did against Mancini. If not I think Hatton Smothers him
