Better fighter Eubank or Hatton?

[The Surgeon]

Who was better Chris Eubank or Ricky Hatton? Hatton has been slated alot on Boxing Scene but ive seen him fight in the flesh a few times and that boy was a terror! Very under rated, he lost to the two best fighters on the planet in ATG's Mayweather and Pacquaio, no shame there and he went out swinging!

Body attack was brutal, he was bull strong and quick too. At his best he was as fit as they come (these days) and u know what he could box a bit too

He gets my vote

[The_Demon]

Id give the edge too hatton.Both were super tough with Eubank being the smarter fighter but ricky always went in there with the best and beat some very good fighters so he gets the nod

[PrinceNaz88]

I would just give it to Hatton.

I find it funny how people mock Hatton for losing to the best two fighters on the planet and then go and mock other fighters for ducking so and so.

Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to judge him purely on those fights with Mayweather and Pacquaio. He should be remembered for being a ferocious puncher at 140 who was a horrible person to fight. He was a 140 fighter, not a 147 fighter.

[BennyST]

People really think Hatton was better than Eubank?

When people talk about overrated fighters I think Hatton ranks right up there with the best. Sorry to offend his fans here. But really, come on...He as a good solid champ who managed to fight the best but never did enough to be considered better than Eubank.

Eubanks was a better fighter and a much better champion. Unlike so many people seem to do with Hatton, I do not rank him higher simply for the fact that he fought Pac and Mayweather. He gets rated much higher than he should only because he fought them. If, as the underdog he was in each, he had put up a great close fight and nearly won I would rate him well for them, but he got outclassed and knocked out in both. You rank a guy higher for underdog fights he lost that he did really well in, not for fights that he got owned and knocked out in.

Both were two weight champs, but Hatton was wrongly called the lineal champion for much too long without ever defending it against any of the top ranked champs and contenders in his division. However, he was a solid champ at the weight and made a three defenses before having a crack at 147, winning a paper title which he never defended. His best win was obviously Tszyu, albeit an aged, part time version. He has other solid wins over a shot Castillo, Malignaggi, Urango, Collazo and an old Phillips.

Eubank was the 160 and 168 champ. He won the MW title off Nigel Benn and the SMW title against Michael Watson in that classic, but tragic, fight. He also made three defenses of his MW title but made a fantastic fifteen defenses of his SMW title. Like Hatton he fought many of the best of his era, though missed out on Jones and Toney. All his losses were close, hard fought decisions even up at CW against champion Carl Thompson in two classic pitched battles at the end of his career.

His best wins would be Nigel Benn, Michael Watson x 2, undefeated former SMW (vacated) and future LHW champ Graciano Rocchigiani, Lindell Holmes, Tony Thornton, Thulani Malinga etc etc.

Popularity doesn't equal a better fighter and Hatton wasn't a better fighter than Eubank. I guess it's just recent memory and all that.

[JAB5239]

People really think Hatton was better than Eubank?

When people talk about overrated fighters I think Hatton ranks right up there with the best. Sorry to offend his fans here. But really, come on...He as a good solid champ who managed to fight the best but never did enough to be considered better than Eubank.

Eubanks was a better fighter and a much better champion. Unlike so many people seem to do with Hatton, I do not rank him higher simply for the fact that he fought Pac and Mayweather. He gets rated much higher than he should only because he fought them. If, as the underdog he was in each, he had put up a great close fight and nearly won I would rate him well for them, but he got outclassed and knocked out in both. You rank a guy higher for underdog fights he lost that he did really well in, not for fights that he got owned and knocked out in.

Both were two weight champs, but Hatton was wrongly called the lineal champion for much too long without ever defending it against any of the top ranked champs and contenders in his division. However, he was a solid champ at the weight and made a three defenses before having a crack at 147, winning a paper title which he never defended. His best win was obviously Tszyu, albeit an aged, part time version. He has other solid wins over a shot Castillo, Malignaggi, Urango, Collazo and an old Phillips.

Eubank was the 160 and 168 champ. He won the MW title off Nigel Benn and the SMW title against Michael Watson in that classic, but tragic, fight. He also made three defenses of his MW title but made a fantastic fifteen defenses of his SMW title. Like Hatton he fought many of the best of his era, though missed out on Jones and Toney. All his losses were close, hard fought decisions even up at CW against champion Carl Thompson in two classic pitched battles at the end of his career.

His best wins would be Nigel Benn, Michael Watson x 2, undefeated former SMW (vacated) and future LHW champ Graciano Rocchigiani, Lindell Holmes, Tony Thornton, Thulani Malinga etc etc.

Popularity doesn't equal a better fighter and Hatton wasn't a better fighter than Eubank. I guess it's just recent memory and all that.

I was a big fan of Hatton. But as Benny say's, Eubank was the much more well rounded fighter.

[mickey malone]

Eubank took the game more seriously and was never one for sitting on the bog when he should have been training. He never affiliated himself with the local darts team or Donner Kebab club and was never seen walking around like Barry White inbetween fights.. Furthermore, he respected his trainer didn't get knocked out and didn't go running to the enemy as soon as he regained consciousness..

Other than that, Hatton could have been greater than Eubank.

[Toney616]

People really think Hatton was better than Eubank?

When people talk about overrated fighters I think Hatton ranks right up there with the best. Sorry to offend his fans here. But really, come on...He as a good solid champ who managed to fight the best but never did enough to be considered better than Eubank.

Eubanks was a better fighter and a much better champion. Unlike so many people seem to do with Hatton, I do not rank him higher simply for the fact that he fought Pac and Mayweather. He gets rated much higher than he should only because he fought them. If, as the underdog he was in each, he had put up a great close fight and nearly won I would rate him well for them, but he got outclassed and knocked out in both. You rank a guy higher for underdog fights he lost that he did really well in, not for fights that he got owned and knocked out in.

Both were two weight champs, but Hatton was wrongly called the lineal champion for much too long without ever defending it against any of the top ranked champs and contenders in his division. However, he was a solid champ at the weight and made a three defenses before having a crack at 147, winning a paper title which he never defended. His best win was obviously Tszyu, albeit an aged, part time version. He has other solid wins over a shot Castillo, Malignaggi, Urango, Collazo and an old Phillips.

Eubank was the 160 and 168 champ. He won the MW title off Nigel Benn and the SMW title against Michael Watson in that classic, but tragic, fight. He also made three defenses of his MW title but made a fantastic fifteen defenses of his SMW title. Like Hatton he fought many of the best of his era, though missed out on Jones and Toney. All his losses were close, hard fought decisions even up at CW against champion Carl Thompson in two classic pitched battles at the end of his career.

His best wins would be Nigel Benn, Michael Watson x 2, undefeated former SMW (vacated) and future LHW champ Graciano Rocchigiani, Lindell Holmes, Tony Thornton, Thulani Malinga etc etc.

Popularity doesn't equal a better fighter and Hatton wasn't a better fighter than Eubank. I guess it's just recent memory and all that.

solid post

[The_Demon]

Ive never really seen people overrate hatton,if anything he is underrated.Im aware of Eubanks solid resume and know he has some very good wins but i give hatton the edge as the overall package,and thats nothing too do with him being 'fresh in my memory' either

[Quarry]

Greatest Super-Middleweight Champions

1/. Roy Jones
2/. James Toney
3/. Michael Nunn
4/. Joe Calzaghe
5/. Ray Leonard
6/. Nigel Benn
7/. Chris Eubank
8/. Andre Ward
9/. Steve Collins
10/. Murray Sutherland

[rsf]

i cant believe people are saying hatton ,for me its eubank no doubt