WHICH WIn WAS BETTER? JOE C vs BHOP or HATTON vs TSZYU

hatton v kostya. tszyu was still reckoned to be near the top of the tree and had looked sensational in his last fight. the pressure was on hatton who had not boxed at that level before and he did a real number on kostya, who hsn't boxed since, quit on his stool and admitted defeat to the better man (on the night). calzaghe had been an elite fighter for years, (though this was not universally recognised). hopkins had only fought once at the weight before and had previously been outworked and outsped by taylor (twice). calzaghes best attributes are his speed and workrate. joes best win was v kessler.

 

spent, winded, old, past his prime: wtf? Until fifteen minutes before fight-time, everybody on this site and every expert in boxing had Hopkins as top 5 pfp. Hopkins didn't age overnight, he faced a more skilled, more adaptable fighter than he had fought in many years. Therefore, the Calzaghe fight was the bigger win b/c he overcame all the US boxing biz odds, all the 'showbiz' and won convincingly against a guy who can still beat most. And he did it years past his own prime, pushing 37 years of age, if I'm not mistaken.

 

Hatton's win for me, too.

:huh

I doubt many of the more credible posters would have had him such.

 

Hattons was much more impressive. He hasn't looked that good since. Calzaghe has looked better in every fight I've seem of his.

 

Hatton

 

hattons for me no matter how he did it, he still ****ing stopped him

 

This content is protected

 

Hattons win was better, opponent was faded but not as badly as Hopkins was - there was also no argument as to who won the Hatton fight.

 

I'd say Hopkins-Calzaghe panned out EXACTLY as nearly everybody in the boxing community expected (other than Joe being knocked down in the first).

But Hatton-Tszyu was a rough, racous fight in front of a HUGE crowd. The tide turned back and forth in an ugly slugfest, but Hatton prevailed convincingly.

And yes, many picked Tszyu to win that fight.

So I do prefer Hatton-Tszyu, in terms of a U.K. fighter beating a fighter who fought more often in America (I guess that's what links these two fights, right?).

 

Any who thinks Calzaghe/Hopkins was the better win is a ****ing idiot, for three obvious reasons.

1. Calzaghe was favoured to beat Hopkins. The betting wasn't really close either. Tszyu was heavily favoured to beat Hatton.

2. Hatton was not in the P4P top 15. Kostyu Tszyu would have been #2 or #3. Calzaghe was ranked just outside the top 5, whereas Hopkins was 4th or 5th.

3. Hatton/Tszyu was decisive. Despite me thinking Calzaghe clearly won the fight, many people think Hopkins did. Those who say Calzaghe won don't go by a wide decision. Tszyu was stopped on his stool after taking a vicious beating.

You can argue the intangibles all you want, but the facts show that the Hatton win was better. There is no other answer, unless, like I said, you're an idiot.

 

Hatton. He was a big underdog. Joe C was the fave. Neither fight was pretty.

 

Perfectly stated. :good

 

well i am an idiot, and let me explain why i disagree.

1) Hatton was such a huge underdog against Tszyu compared to Calzaghe against Hopkins because Hatton was not held in as high regard as Calzaghe. However, lets assume that both Tszyu and Hopkins were held in approximately the same regard at the time of the fights (Tszyu and Hopkins were both approximately p4p 3-5). Therefore this means that relative to their own career, Hatton's win is much more important than Calzaghe's, but in an absolute comparison with all other great wins, beating Tszyu in the last fight of his career is not that much more impressive than beating Hopkins in what should be his last fight.

I'm gonna give you a more polarized example to illustrate the point. Brian Vera's win over Andy Lee was more surprising than Floyd's win over Ricky Hatton. Vera was a huge underdog and was supposed to get walked over, while Floyd was a favorite. Does that mean that Biran Vera's win over Andy Lee is better than Mayweather's win over Ricky Hatton? Maybe relative to his own career, but in the larger perspective, Floyd beat a top10 p4p guy, while Vera beat a nobody.

I'm not saying that Tszyu was a nobody, I am simply countering your point that because Hatton was an underdog, this makes the win any better. Hatton was a bigger underdog than Calzaghe because before their respective fights people thought Calzaghe was much better than Hatton, not because they thought Tszyu was much better than Hopkins

2) Very similar to point one. Yes, for their respective careers, Hatton's win meant more than Calzaghe's win, but from an absolute perspective, beating Hopkins and beating Tszyu at the time these two brits beat them is very similar. Also, Hopkins is a stylistic nightmare for Calzaghe, while Hatton is a stylistic nightmare for Tszyu. Overall, Calzaghe is the one who climbed the bigger mountain, just because he is a better climber doesn't make his feat less impressive

3) This is where we differ the most. I thought Calzaghe beat Hopkins more convincingly than Hatton beat Tszyu. In my opinion from watching the fight, Hatton took advantage of the fact that the fight was in his hometown to appoint a biased and unfair ref. A massive advantage that without, I don't think Hatton would have been able to win. On the flip side, Calzaghe went and convincingly beat Hopkins in his back yard with an american ref, and 3 american judges.

In my eyes Calzaghe's win is the one that says more "Yes, on this night, this fighter was better than his opponent." imo Tszyu was better than Hatton, but the ref tipped the balance ever so slightly in Hatton's favor



So thats this idiot's point of view.

 

Hatton IMO

 

The truth !