If Hatton beats manny pacquiao does he surpass Calzaghe in the British ATG rankings?

Thats were you've got this thread totally wrong, a critique on the fighters styles has got nothing to do with it .. The only question is,

Do you think Joe Calzaghe fought anybody with the kind of class that Floyd Mayweather had or Manny Pac has ??

And the answer to any rational, sane person is No .. so even if Ricky Hatton does have a loss to Floyd on his record its equalled out by the fact that Joe never had to face a guy like Floyd Mayweather .. If Ricky gets beat by Pac then to alot of people the Calzaghe or Hatton argument will be settled, because they find comfort in the fact that Hatton would have lost 2 and Joe lost 0 . Therefore to these ignorant morons who know nothing about boxing, Joe Calzaghe must be the better fighter .. It just doesnt work like that

 

At the same time Axl, nobody deserves huge credit for simply getting whooped by elite fighters. There is nothing impressive about that, hundreds of journeymen have done it.

I know everybody somehow thinks Mayweather-Hatton was competitive, but it wasn't, he simply got beat up in there at his own game.

 

If you look at the other fighters they beat, Ricky also has Urango, Maussa, Malignaggi, has also been in there with top P4P fighter twice by the time he fights Pac....Joe C has Lacy, Mitchell, Brewer, Sheika, and a way shot Roy Jones, which means Joe C has beaten one of the greatest H2H fighters of all time, despite how shot he was.

I actually think they're pretty close already. Even though I went to see Calzaghe vs. Kessler (and I live in England so I like Joe C enough to make the trip) I don't rate Calzaghe as high as say Marciano, who althouh he only beat three past-it figthers late on, they were at a high enough calibre to put him near my top fifty.

I put Calzaghe in their with Pryor and Lopez, dominant fighters who never really fought the best.

If B-Hop had retired after Calzaghe and hadn't gone on to do what he's trying to achieve now, I'd rate Calzaghe even less. As it stands my top 3 British fighters are;

1) Lewis
2) Buchanan
3) Calzaghe

A win for Hatton over Pac would be monumental. They say Pac is coming up, but he has looked good carrying 147 lbs against an admittedly shot fighter, I think he will be comfortable at 140 and that Ricky should be given full credit for beating him. If he were to beat Marquez I'd give him credit too, Marquez has looked increasingly more powerful and comfortable since he moved up to 135 lbs, no reason why he'd be 'shot' if he moved up 5 lbs North (although I know Hatton is a beast of lww by fight night)

 

TFFP i always respect your opinions and enjoy reading your views. Your right when you say Hatton shouldnt be given any credit for being destroyed by Mayweather but at least Hatton is on the record for fighting a guy of Mayweather's class .. Calzaghe's legacy will always be picked over, there will be guys that say he's the greatest and there will be guys who pick him apart .. Im a guy that will always pick him apart because im a student of boxing. That sounds like an arrogant statement but i promise you its not. There are plenty of people with a greater knowledge of boxing than me but i like to think i have a historical knowledge of boxing in the last 100 years and that is why Joe Calzaghe doesnt make any impact for me, he's a 'Truly Modern' fighter, wereas Hatton is a guy that you can envisage, toiling away in any decade of the sport ..

Joe Calzaghe is without doubt the greatest Super MiddleWeight of all time, but the 168 division has no historical importance at all .. This division is 20 years old, it was created for one reason and one reason alone. Governing bodies and tv companies wanted to take advantage of the dying embers of Sugar Ray Leonard's career and they made plenty of money out of it ..
In a historical sense you have to either judge Calzaghe against the great 160 fighters of all time like Hagler, Monzon and Greb or you have to compare him to the great 175 fighters of all time like Foster, Moore, Charles and Tunney. Either way it becomes clear that Joe Calzaghe is in fact a King of a nothing division .. he wouldnt make 160 and he'd be destroyed by the great 175 fighters, so hes the King of the 168's. To boxing fans with any knowledge this means nothing. Maybe in 50 years the 168 division will mean something but at this point it doesnt count for anything 'historically'. Its the most meaningless division in boxing with Cruiserweight ..

Hatton on the other hand is in the mix 'historically', because Mayweather and Pacquiao will always be remembered alongside the heroes of the past ..

 

Yes. He will then have 2 wins on his resume better than any on Joe's res - Tszyu and Pacquiao. And the Pac win will just be so so much better and more important than anything Joe ever done that it will give Hatton the edge...

...but Hatton won't beat Pacquiao. So Joe will stay ahead. Because he never fought the prime p4p#1s of his era (Jones 97-01, Hopkins 01-04) and so didn't incur the losses he surely would have, whereas Hatton did have the balls to risk it (Mayweather 05-07, Pacquiao 08-present).

 

It's pretty straight forward. Pound-for-pound, talent-wise, who do you class as the more skilled & dangerous fighter at the weight at the time of fighting, Pac or Kessler?

Answer that question, answer the thread.

 

I respect your post totally but i have to disagree with you comparing Calzaghe to Lopez and Pryor ..
Lopez for me is up there with the P4P greatest in history. He operated in a division which seldom got coverage but his talent and his boxing ability was crystal clear to see, he was absolutely sensational .. Ive never been convinced with Calzaghe because ive never been convinced with his opposition ..
Pryor is very interesting in that his career is somewhat tainted with controversy. His Arguello win was his legacy but rightly or wrongly its tainted because of his corner man, Panama Lewis .. I like Pryor but i personally think he would be beaten by Duran, Chavez and Whitaker at 135 and would be taken out by Curry, Leonard and Hearns at the higher weight ..

I also totally disagree with your ranking of Lewis ahead of Buchanan .. Lewis made his name beating past they're primes Tyson and Holyfield. He beat a few no talent contenders in Tua, Grant, Bruno, Mavrovic, Golota and Briggs but he also got sparked out by 2 bum heavyweights in McCall and Rahman .. No great heavyweight in history got knocked out by 2 guys with such limited ability and this weighs heavy on Lewis's legacy

 

So you agree with me, its Manny Pac all the way considering Kessler's best fight was a losing effort against Joe Calzaghe .. I cant believe the guys who shout about Kessler, sure he's a decent fighter, but what has he acheived, who has he beaten of any note ?? Nobody .. The Calzaghe fans love bringing up Kessler like he's somehow Sugar Ray Robinson but in fact he's acheived nothing of any note .. The 'Kessler' argument is so ridiculous .... That fight was a couple of years ago, if Kessler was such a world beater why arent we seeing him dealing with Pavlik, Abraham Hopkins or Dawson ...... Were the hell has this brilliant ATG fighter gone ?? To some on this forum Mikkell Kessler is the greatest fighter of all time .... For some reason i dont see it .. Lovely tattoo's though ..

 

Don't assume I agree with you. Give him time.

By the way, yes I do agree it's Pac all the way, but I think you've gone too far the other way. Kessler had the tools to beat Joe just not the brains. In the next few years I honestly believe Kessler will clean up.

And stop over-using full-stops, this isn't a World War II Telegram.

 

So how long are you giving Kessler to clean up, its gotta be 18 months - 2 years since he lost to Calzaghe .. When in fact is he going to 'Make his big move' ?? and what division is he going to beat all comers in the way Manny Pac has done ..

Your dreaming mate .. And if Axl wants to use a million dots he can because he knows way more than you about boxing ..............................................................................................................

 

And never advise me on what to do .. Listen buddy, whatever 'AXL' says, you get a pen and write down, you might learn something .. For you to seriously compare Kessler to Pac is quite ridiculous and shows me you know nothing .... Kessler is a nobody in a nothing division (168), 168 has always been a nothing division, a stepping stone between 160 and 175 .. If like you say Kessler is to acheive any kind of legacy, he has to do it at 175 .. let me give you some more full-stops, i know you love them .................................................................................................................................................

 

Your grammar, punctuation and spelling are ****ing hurrendous. I literally can't take you seriously.

 

Ive just been reviewing your previous posts on here and it is totally embarrassing .... You've got posts about ***** sizes, Andy Murray v Federer and all kinds of weird non-boxing crap .... I will definately be ignoring your opinions in future .. Your clearly a weirdo with no boxing credibility

 

Oh Jesus ****ing Christ, my friend, Axl, you are a bona-fide ****** who has just replied to a single post of mine THREE TIMES.

Do you mean DEFINITELY by the way??

 

For a guy that spells horrendous as 'Hurrendous' your a complete joke .. You belong on the 'General Forum' with the other drunks, coke-heads and children .... Im just not going to talk to you any more, i've exposed you as an idiot who knows nothing ..
There are plenty of people who i respect on here but you are an absolute loser who knows nothing about boxing and im not wasting any more time on you ..