compared to witter-hatton? no thanks. if it went ahead though maybe on the undercard we could have DLH-calzaghe and haye-pavlik. you know, some more equal, legacy making matches that actually count for something.
Understand that your dealing with one of the biggest morons p4p on ESB here mate. Hes public enemy number 1 on these boards. If you look through this thread, you will see numerous examples of his hypocrisy.
Because I don't agree with your view of Hatton? I've seen him prove he's the best at 140 for the last 3 years and fighting Witter would do nothing more than prove it again. I don't see how it's an essential fight that must be made at this stage. There are other options for him. Witter has none.
legacy wise witter is the one that does most for him and let's face it, hatton isn't in the sort of position that calzaghe finds himself in where his legacy is secure and he can just go after the ££££££££. hatton's legacy is shaky...
I would have them about equal to be honest. Most of Joe's endless meaningless defences of the WBO were comparable to the endless meaningless defences made by Hatton. Since they both stepped up to the plate, I would still say it is about par. Tzsyu > Ashira Maussa < Lacy Collazo > Bika Urango > Manfredo Castillo < Kessler Mayweather > Hopkins Lazcano < Jones? 4-3 to Hatton for me!
Legacy wise the best win for Hatton is....PAC. When people mentioned Hopkin's resume, does he get more credit for De La Hoya/Trinidad or Eastman? Beating the P4P#2 even if he has come through the weights beats more than beating a no mark like Witter. It's quite obvious what happens after Hatton beats Witter. "Oh well, I knew he'd win, I just wanted to see him finally do it, he took his time, who has Witter fought, why was he so scared for so long?" etc.