In both of these bouts highly ranked American boxers faced off against highly ranked UK boxers. In the case of Calzaghe/Lacy it was Lace who travled to the UK and got beat. In the case of Mayweather/Hatton it was Hatton who came to the US and got beat. In both cases the boxer who traviled overseas lost. My question is their a "hometown" advantage that will contune with the Calzaghe/Hopkins fight or where the results and whatever result Calzaghe/Hopkins winds up as be a case of the better man wining regaurdless of loction of the fight?
The massively better skilled boxers won in both fights. A pair of total mismatches wherever they took place.
The gap in talent and ability between Lacy and Calzaghe was huge. They could've fought in Florida and I can't see Lacy making it close or competitive. Same with Mayweather-Hatton, although the gap in ability was certainly closer than in Calzaghe-Lacy. Hopkins-Calzaghe is a closer match than those two.
Hatton brought 20,000 fans and a freakin band in addition to that ... it was just like being at home. The good thing that Hatton did was bring the UK with him ... Lacy traveled because it was more money to be made fighting in the UK than it was in the US -- where Calzaghe wasn't respected and didn't have a big name. He was recognized amoung the boxing community but was always criticized for being sheltered and protected.
I agree the gap between Hatton and Mayweather wasn't the same as Calzaghe and Lacy, although I do honestly believe that more than that Calzaghe was a more skilled than Lacy, Jeff had a bad night. His gameplan was one set for failure and it proved correct. Hatton's gameplan by the later rounds was the same type of gameplan (go for a KO) and he too suffered failure in it. On the subject of hometown advantage, I think a highly skilled boxer knows how to overcome the negativity. In Mayweather's case, he's been booed so many times its natural to him....hences he plays the bad guy.
