Hattons punch resistance is NOT gone!!

I dont understand why these Hatton jocks cant even see this simple fact.

 

Nope. Thaxton cut him to ribbons but that was it.

 

Well exactly, it doesn't matter how good your chin is, if you walk straight into Manny Pac's punches like that you're gonna get knocked out, plain and simple.

Relentless, watch the footage I posted, the Sky commentator says "and Hatton is down for the first time in his career...." You talk like an expert on Hatton's career but you make schoolboy errors like this over and over again.

Ricky had a good chin in his prime, this was proven against Phillips, Tackie and Tszyu. He would not have won those fights without a good chin, because he certainly didn't have a good defence. He blocked Tszyu's shots with his face and just kept coming.

After that, his punch resistance gets worse, plenty of people were calling it at the time, but this is no way diminishes Manny Pac's victory over him, nor does it take away any of the glory.

 

Oh yeah, and someone back me up on this, since when was Hatton "bigger" than Collazo? That's the most stupid thing I've heard on here in a while. Can someone else please go through the motions of explaining why this is untrue, I think my head will explode if I have to do it myself.

 

They said Hatton was bigger than Pac. In almost all there statistics bar one (Pacs fist) Pac was the bigger man. Either way its completely immaterial. If you can make the weight then you can fight there. Pac made 140 no excuses. He once made 106. He has won and lost at varying weights. As soon as Ricky looked **** moving 7lbs north - bearing in mind Pac has added nearly 50lbs over the years- weight becomes a pathetically paltry excuse. His fans glibly ignore the fact that he simply doesnt have the skills or style to trouble guys at a higher weight much less in his division or at a lower weight. So far he's been annihilated by 2 guys who started there careers at Super Feather and Flyweight. So much for his fabled size advantage.

 

Phillips was so old the guy was spitting dust. A win over an aged crackhead was NOT an indication of ANYTHING. Likewise Kostya put on a boxing clinic prior to Rickys win over Tackie. Tackie could bang and i did expect him to KO Ricky back then. Ricky was hurt badly by Tackie but Tackie only possess a punch and a chin. Other than that he was a boxing simpleton. Those 2 victories were certainly NOT an indication of a good chin. Ricky rarely got caught. And when he did he was hurt. He boxed Tackie from a distance because he was wary of his power and he spent the Phillips fight on Phillips chest.

When he fought Kostya he smothered everything Kostya did and spent the night in his grill. An excellent tactic as proven by a prime Vince Phillips who did exactly the same and laid the blueprint. The diffrence is Hatton was always a pressure fighter. At Kostya's age his was a style that in hindsight certainly gave Kostya alot of problems in addition to an excellent gameplan.

 

Quite semantic and pretty much immaterial. Ricky blows up to as much as 190lbs inbetween fights. Collazo does not.

 

Well he has never been shook by EVERY punch that lands before, and Phillips,Tszyu probably hit as hard as Pac, if not harder. There is no way he takes a punch that way he used to. Regardless whether he did not take a great shot in the first place or not.

 

The obvious diffrence here is Kostya DID NOT land cleanly nor often on Hatton. If he did Hatton would have been KO'ed. To argue feeble semantics on why Hatton wasnt hurt vs Kostya but was against Pac is akin to saying Douglas was a better puncher than Holy because of his KO over Tyson. We know the former is not true. This is the nature of boxing. There are NO MATHS involved.

Ricky got hit cleanly and often. Subsequently he was KO'ed. Thats the nature of physics. Nothing else needs to be construded from that other than the incredibly obvious.

 

I agree about Tszyu.

I dont like Hatton myself , but to argue his punch resistance is the same as it was is ludicrous. Juan Lazcano would of never hurt the old Hatton.

 

Manuel Medina went 11 rounds with a prime Naz. Against JMM he was destroyed in 7 rounds in one of the most clinic displays of box punching i have ever seen. Was Naz any less of a puncher? Matter of fact Scott Harrison a rough housing brusier -who should have been awarded a KO vs McCullough when his ear was swollen grotesquely in massively one sided beat down- couldnt even put a dent in Medina and lost a 12 round decision. In there following fight he knocked Medina out. Medina was well known for his durability.

 

Thats simply an utterly childish and useless argument. There is NO WAY TO QUANTIFY ANYTHING IN BOXING THROUGH MEASUREMENT. Its abudantly clear that at lightweight Lazcano was a superior fighter to the likes of most of the WBU cans that Hatton fought. But on your premise you glibly think that can be measured because of his previous peformances vs a bunch of cans? What kind of reasoning is that supposed to be? The OLD Hatton was fighting club fighters and Danish road sweepers. As his competition went up did you actually think he could do the same things he was doing against World Class talent?

The point here is a simple one and il say it one more time for those that dont seem top understand the basic tenets of cause and effect. You get hit cleanly and often you get knocked out. End of story end of thread. No fighter is any diffrent.

When Hatton was fighting for the WBU he rarely moved his head or fought talented enough fighters to bring out his mettle. As his competition got better he did exactly the same. Against Pac he reverted to type because thats what fighters do. Ricky isnt a rookie. His not a prospect he's a seasoned veteran. If he thinks he can wade in vs bonafide punchers then he's an idiot. Ricky has ALWAYS done this. Nothing throughout his career has changed.