Hatton wants true Greatness? Margarito has just given him a lifeline...

Not neccessarily, its not a pre-requisite if you have enough good competition at your own weight. However, if you are a great fighter and find yourself having to go up in weight you should be able to put on 7 pounds and at least beat a FRINGE TOP TEN contender fairly easily. We aren't asking miracles here.

 

Aaron Pryor got TKO'ed in his first outing at welter against Bobby Joe Young (31-7-1). His only ever defeat, to a guy who never won a title, and only claim to fame is beating Pryor.

 

What, on his 3rd comeback from retirement - way to prove a point! atsch

Hatton was supposed to be somewhere near his prime when he nearly got knocked out by the heavy hitting Collazo and scraped a debateable decision.

Ricky Hatton will never be successful boxer at anything other than a weight where he can bully and wrestle his opponent. He is lacking in skill, thats the main problem. It ain't **** to do with prime weights, Floyd Mayweather is a former junior lightweight. Pacquaio former flyweight. De La Hoya how many weights? Hopkins...Toney. Calzaghe did it recently. Eubank did it. Benn did it.

The list goes on. They had skill, not just strength.

 

Pryor was past it by then.

 

Joe hardly looked great in his first outing at LH against the 43 yr old Hopkins did he now. Hopkins isn't even a natural LH. Your in danger of sinking your favourite boxer here with your very own new found criteria. If you place such value on weight movement; in the grand scheme of things Joe doesn't score many points at all.

 

Yes, I agree, but the point I was making is that he only fought at one weight till then. Just like Ken Buchanan did. People were stating that, that isn't really good enough to make the HOF (till the goalposts were moved).

 

I agree with you, moving up in weight isn't everything. Look at Hagler and Monzon and more recently Tzyu.

I'm a fan of Pryor and didn't want him discreted for losing when he was past it .

 

I'm in danger of doing precisely **** all except point out the obvious to a halfwit.

Joe Calzaghe was fighting the #1 guy that schooled the lineal champion, in his first fight +7lbs above his "natural weight" - as Hatton fans like to say.

Ricky Hatton was fighting a guy that would be in the lower reaches of a top 10 holding a paper belt.

I hope you can realise the difference here.

I don't place that much emphasis on jumping weights, far from it. However it is pretty much an indictment on a guys skill level when he can't even convincingly beat a mundane top 10 guy when he's only added a few pounds and is at his peak. What are we supposed to read into that? This guy can't box, he can only outwrestle and outbrawl.

 

You're making these conditions just to suit your point, I've never heard anyone state that one of the criteria must fullfilled in order for a fighter to be considered for the HOF is that he must be able to comfortably beat a fringe contender in the next division up. Where did you get that? Bert Sugar? Nat Fleisher? atsch

 

OK, he looked far from great, but he came away with a UD and WBA welter weight title. Perhaps it was just an off night, fighters have off nights. I really don't think winning a welter WBA title is a point to hang Hatton on.

 

It's not a criteria. It's an indictment on the level of skill that Hatton has attained, and in turn a reason why he should NOT be considered a HOF fighter under any circumstances.

 

Did I used to bother replying to these posts? :nut

 

Looks like they need to kick Bob Foster out of "the Hall" as well.....

 

He was a world champion that won his title fighting overseas in oppresive heat conditions. He lost controversialy to Duran and is one of the finest fighters this country has ever produced.

 

You're just making this stuff up as you go along.:roll:

Fighters do not have to meet some vague "skill level" (of yours or anyones elses deciding) before they get into the HOF.