Is Witter already #1?

Sorry man it's just every Hatton discussion involve bringing someone else into the equation in an attempt to justify his actions. Just finished watching the Tszyu fight again & there is no way Hatton would have won had Cortez been in charge. Anyone who says that wasn't an ugly fight must be a real fanboy. I can understand people finding it exciting for the occasion but the actual fight was not great to watch.

Anyway, I really am sick of talking about Hatton. I'm going to try not to get involved in anymore discussions about him for a while.

 

I keep saying that to myself about Hatton-Witter, its pretty difficult!!!

 

its a weak division when you step back and look at it

Hatton is #1 just about but thats still by virtue of the fact he beat Tsyzu nearly 3 years ago.

Witter and Paulie are decent champions but neither have beat a world class fighter.

The gap between them and Hatton isn't much and im not saying that Hatton would beat both of them but on achievements he ranks ahead of them

Paul McCloskey KO Hatton round 1

 

Id say he was no.1, if a paper number one.

 

Stupid thread.

Of course he's not #1, nobody in the universe with any credibility rates Witter #1 at 140. Not anybody.

 

Even if you don't rate linear titles too much Hatton has beaten Zoo, Maussa, Collazo, Urango and JLC in the same time frame that Witter has beaten Kotelnik, Lynes, Corely, Moura and Harris. You can split hairs about which fighters were shot or faded (Zoo, JLC, Harris, Corely), maybe not true would class in the first place (Urango, Lynes) or not light welterweights (Collazo, Welter champ) but the bottom line is Witter has done nowhere near enough to prove he's the number 1 at 140 over Hatton who "beat the man, who beat the man".

 

Why do we now have to have this totally arbitary 2 1/2 year cut off point? Beacause you think it suits Witters argument?

Witter has fought two other former belt holders at 140 not champions in Corely and Harris (both who'd lost to other titlests at 140), just like Collazo was at 147. Hatton was 1-1 at 147 and only losing to the P4P number 1, thats not doing too badly.

But thats by-the-by, you can put different spins and bias on the two fighters opponents but I've listed them from the time that Hatton beat Zoo to be generally accepted as champ and no way does Witters resume prove he's the number one at 140 over Hatton based on opponents fought/ beaten.

 

Whats this "2 1/2 years thing"???? Its irrelevant.

Hatton became generally accepted champ at 140 when he beat Zoo...Yes?

Since then what in Witters record at 140, against Hattons record at 140, suggests that he should displace Hatton at number 1?

 

So 2 1/2 years is enough time to make a relevant point but 3 years (which inconviently for your argument includes the Zoo fight) is too long and is just dismissed as 'history' ? Thats so transparent....:roll:

Pavlik (unlike Hatton) hasn't been number 1 at his weight for the last 2 1/2 years. Up until last year he was fighting his way up against McKart, Pierre and Zurtuche which is hardly proving yourself in world class. Besides, champions generally fight less often than contenders, thats just a boxing fact so God only knows what point you are trying to make there....:huh

At least compare like for like....Pac has met good competition at 130 over the last few years but I doubt you chose him at random as you claim....Hattons record at 140 racks up fine against most champions at other weights (and against Witters FFS!) since he won the title. Witter just hasn't done enough since Hatton has been champ to change the status quo.

 

I think many of you make valid points, for both sides.

My opinion is that Hatton is No.1, a guy who has had 42 fights at 140, and never looked like losing.

Witter has lost only 1 in 39, with two early draws, but almost blew the N'Dou fight, had a close call against Kotelnik and a slightly lesser one against Colin Lynes, who wasn't as good then as he is now.

All this about Castillo/Corley/Harris being shot, I would have backed either Hatton or Witter to have beaten any of those, all at their peak.

Kostya Tszyu wasn't shot at all, was coming off a long injury, with a tune up win against Sharmba Mitchell, not exactly a bum, so I don't see where your argument comes from. Also, all this about not fighting again, it is a sign of a great champion (in any sport) to go out on your own terms instead of fighting on (and probably winning) just for the sake of it.

It is a fight I, and most others, would like to see, but there is nothing in Witter's record that says he would beat Hatton - that doesn't mean he can't (he can) but please, stand up straight instead of saluting a messiah!