Calzaghe/ Kessler is two undefeated champions fighting to become the undisputed SMW champion Mayweather/Hatton is a fight between two undefeated, ring champions Cotto/Mosely is between a 36 year old man at the end of his career with no titles and a 27 year old paper champion(I'm not trying to put him down, but his title was vacant when he won it).
Quote: Originally Posted by Action Mosley has losses. The others are undefeated champions and are the top in their divisions. AND YOUR POINT BEING???? Let me spell it out slowly for the less fortunate---There are two points: point 1 being that they are historic matchups between undefeated champions point 2 that neither "historic" fight involves Oscar DLH
The only point in this thread is that Mayweather-Hatton and Calzaghe-Kessler are genuine historic fights cause they involve British fighters, and not Oscar De La Hoya since everybody knows that Oscar De La Hoya vs Bernard Hopkins and Oscar De La Hoya vs Shane Mosley II and Oscar De La Hoya vs Floyd Mayweather were the biggest fights built in these 2000s...Actually, Lennox Lewis vs Mike Tyson was also big ( money), truth be told.
It has nothing to do with being British. It has to do with great matches involving exciting, undefeated champions in their prime. DLH-Hopkins and PBF-DLH were not even good matches to begin with. Remember Oscar actually probably lost or at least looked bad versus Sturm going into the Hopkins fight and was only 1-1 in the three years prior to Mayweather.
Calzaghe vs. Kessler has historical significance in its division. The winner will be remembered as the best or second best ever at the weight. Mayweather vs. Hatton is significant in the fact that it is between two undefeated, multi-division world champions. But in a historical sense, within its division, it doesn't match up with Calzaghe-Kessler. But that is because the welterweight division is a classical division and the super middleweight division is a relatively new one. Whether or not both will become classic FIGHTS is yet to be seen. For boxing's sake, let's all hope they exceed the hype.
Okay, Hatton is in his prime but he's still making his second welterweight fight ( despite both having been for welterweight titles) and nobody considers him to be a top 5 welterweight so it's a Floyd Mayweather fight against an undefeated world-class british fighter but why should this be more historic than Oscar De La Hoya vs Tito Trinidad, Oscar De la Hoya vs Ike Quartey, Shane Mosley vs Vernon Forrest, Roy Jones Jr vs James Toney, Shane Mosley vs Phillip Holyday, Julio Cesar Chavez vs Angel Hernandez, Crisanto Espana vs Ike Quartey, they were all between undefeated "Champions"... I don't know about being exciting cause that's just subjective, nothing excites me about both Mayweather and Hatton... Oscar De La Hoya vs Bernard Hopkins and Oscar De la Hoya vs Floyd Mayweather were still top PPV fights and why should that be? Not surely because they were supposed to be "not even good matches" and if that is the case, then you cannot proclaim Mayweather-Hatton and Calzaghe-Kessler to be historic until they're over to see how good they really are...But I can most definitely say still that they are historic in the British Boxing History.
