Who's win over Malignaggi was more impressive?

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by JFT96, Aug 4, 2010.

  1. TheUzi

    TheUzi MISSION INCOMPLETE Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Messages:
    7,358
    Likes Received:
    0
    This post smacks of bias to be honest. Hatton outboxed Paulie and made him look useless at times. And as dftaylor said,Cotto did the same.
    That being said i'm going with Khan because it was his first fight in the US. He showed blinding speed and improved power.
    If I was judging on only the performance,i'd pick Hatton's as I feel Khan's wasn't as disiplined as his previous fight.

    The odds were 1/2 in the UK and nearer 1/4 in Vegas.
     
  2. NoHomeJerome

    NoHomeJerome Boxing Junkie banned

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2010
    Messages:
    8,229
    Likes Received:
    0
    He won't have watched the fight. He only watches Khan fights.
     
  3. TommyV

    TommyV Loyal Member banned

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Messages:
    32,127
    Likes Received:
    41
    Khan's. Malignaggi was coming off a better win and better performance going into that fight, and was stopped in a more legitimate manner. Did no better against Khan than he did against Hatton. The thing I saw with the Hatton fight, when Malignaggi actually boxed, he was running circles around Hatton. He did it for one round, then lost his rhythm, abandoned his jab, became flat-footed and just got outmuscled. Khan picked him to pieces and I feel Khan's own performance was more impressive than Hatton's, so I feel his win is better.
     
  4. skel1983

    skel1983 Guest


    Mayweather was around 4/11 if my memory servs me rite.
     
  5. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    61,460
    Likes Received:
    42
    Tommy, maybe Hatton had some part in Paulie only being able to box effectively for the first round? Paulie won the first round while Hatton was having a look.
     
  6. dftaylor

    dftaylor Writer, fanatic Full Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2010
    Messages:
    20,730
    Likes Received:
    1
    I think the wins are about equal. They were fights designed to make the A-side look good, and they both looked good. I'd side with Khan slightly because of the vast difference in experience between him and Hatton at the times they faced Paulie, but there's little in it.

    I think Cotto did a much better job than either. Paulie was undefeated, boxed the best he could and got the hell beaten out of him. Anyone other than Smoger would have stopped that fight. So much so that I think that's why he stopped him against Khan.
     
  7. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    82,426
    Likes Received:
    1,478
    I don't disagree with Tommy often, but I'm with you here Gaz.

    Ricky was clearly waiting. He signalled his intent in the 2nd, and Paulie never recovered from that shot.

    Paulie wasn't helped by McGirt, but Paulie isn't stupid, he couldn't get anything going.

    Hatton outboxed Paulie IMO. Course there was te usual roughouse tactis from Ricky, but he methodically and soundly outpointed Paulie, winning every round bar the first IMO.

    Khan looked very aesthetically pleasing, I'll give him that. But I always knew he would cause Paulie every problem he could think of, Khan had no worries about being hurt and could do his thing.

    Paulie couldve feasibly outmanouvered Ricky at that point, he'd looked shopworn against Lazcano. You can't just look at the Paulie each man faced, you must also look at who Paulie was fighting.

    Hattons win was the better one IMO.
     
  8. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    61,460
    Likes Received:
    42


    Cotto never had that style to keep his foot on the gas. He'd pummel Paulie but then ease off just enough to give Smoger reason to let the fight continue.
     
  9. hitman_hatton1

    hitman_hatton1 Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,733
    Likes Received:
    7
    hatton.

    close though.

    thought hatton laid it on him a bit more.:bbb

    whereas khan picked him off with jabs a lot but missed the meat & 2 veg punches quite a bit.
     
  10. dftaylor

    dftaylor Writer, fanatic Full Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2010
    Messages:
    20,730
    Likes Received:
    1
    That's a fair point, but that beating probably took years off of his career.
     
  11. Pug1list

    Pug1list Boxing Addict Full Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2008
    Messages:
    6,488
    Likes Received:
    4
    Both equal, Khan did it on the outside, Hatton on the inside, both effective.
     
  12. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    61,460
    Likes Received:
    42
    Paulie is one tough cookie, I don't think he'd have beaten Hatton or Khan or had a better/ longer career if he hadn't have got the beating against Cotto.

    He had his limitations, won belts and money but I think those limitations were always going to cost him against the top guys.
     
  13. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    82,426
    Likes Received:
    1,478
    I agree with Gaz again.

    Paulie really is/was nothng special. I wouldn't say he was particular brilliant, and he gets kudos for taking a beating against Cotto. If it was a classic back and forth with Paulie really causing Miguel problems, okay, he would've proved himself a formidable fighter.

    A lot of his career has been hit and miss; I felt Ngoudjo beat him.
     
  14. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    61,460
    Likes Received:
    42
    Great minds!!!:D
     
  15. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    82,426
    Likes Received:
    1,478
    I'm not worthy of having my mind compared to yours :deal :lol: