Ricky Hatton: Honest Analysis Please

he was a 2 weight world champ people who say he has no skill....well he has more ****ing skill in his left nut then all you haters. he might of not been the most skilled boxer but he was a world champion (world class fighter) he lost to the 2 best p4p fighters who almost everyone between 140-147 would lose to.

problem with ricky is he hasnt got the raw hunger that he had before mayweather ruined him, if he's serious then fight timothy bradley. people forget just how hard ricky hatton hits as a lightwelter, his body punching is second to none. neither bradley, peterson, alexander or khan hit as hard as ricky. he's a seasoned pro, but if he jus bumrushes his punches like against lazcano, then anyone can/will knock him out. if he's focused and thinks before throwing then he matches ANYBODY at light-welter. its all a case of which ricky hatton turns up

I've followed Ricky Hatton's career for many years and attended a number of his fights, including those two which he lost. Both in fairly dominating fashion. What confuses me though, is why so many in the community write him off as a "bum" or "shot" because of two losses. Not only are there only TWO losses, but they were both to fighters who at the time of the fight were considered the best in the world. So what we can deduce from that is "Ok, he's not the best in the world", but there are many fighters, Luis Collazo, Miguel Cotto, Joshua Clottey, Juan Diaz, Sergio Martinez, Winky Wright, I could go on for days that ARE NOT and WILL NEVER BE the best in the world. Despite this many people support them, and very FEW people are going off about how they're shot. Why is it Ricky can't just be a good fighter who isn't quite great enough to fight the best? Why is he "SHOT" and a "BUM" because he can't beat the p4p kings? It makes no sense. I'd like to see him again before labeling him shot. But obviously he's past his best. And even in his wins against the likes of Lazcano I thought that was obvious.

So what we can deduce from that is "Ok, he's not the best in the world", but there are many fighters, Luis Collazo, Miguel Cotto, Joshua Clottey, Juan Diaz, Sergio Martinez, Winky Wright, I could go on for days that ARE NOT and WILL NEVER BE the best in the world. Despite this many people support them, and very FEW people are going off about how they're shot. Why is it Ricky can't just be a good fighter who isn't quite great enough to fight the best? Why is he "SHOT" and a "BUM" because he can't beat the p4p kings? It makes no sense. Hatton was a good fighter and did very very well considering his skills or lack of. He will get harsher criticism and called shot which other fighter'swith similar records wont for two main reasons. His lack of defence means that he takes and has taken too much punishment and he has a lot of wear and tear as a result. He is not a fresh veteran that has avoided wars. His constant ballooning and stripping for fights is not healthy and will really show as he gets older.

Lets not forget that Thomas Hearns got knocked out by Hagler in 3 rounds.....nobody said he was shot, just when you get two offensive fighters in the ring together...people get knocked out. Doesnt mean hes shot, i just question whether his desire is really there anymore Hearns was in the fight. Hatton was not. And Hearns knockout wasnt a Americas funniest home videos funny diving head first into a pole, or highlight reel stone-cold knockout where you actually thought he was dead.

It's mostly Americans, they hate on all the British fighters: Haye, Khan, Calzaghe, Hatton, Hamed, Benn...the more popular the fighters are the more they hate, hence Hatton and Calzaghe getting most of the criticism. Boxingscene is an American site and US fighters aren't doing as well as they used to so it's to be expected. Edit: I should add, it's not all Americans, some give him respect and praise but they're vastly out-numbered by haters. People from other nations usually give him his credit. im from California and have always been a fan of Ricky's. to this day, i still re-watch all his early fights, because the guy was tenacious. the fight with Kosta was one of my favorite fights. I thought he did really well against Collazo for being the smaller guy, but he showed that 147 might be too much for him. rooted for him against Floyd even though i knew he would be outclassed. he wasn't the same after that loss. he's not one of the elite, but he's a good fighter. with the right training, he can still win a big fight. the thing about Hatton that i always liked is that he'll fight anyone. anyone calling him a bum is 1) not a fan 2) has a thing against brits 3) has not watched any of his early fights

Hatton depends on being able to overpower his opposition. If he can't fight at 140 anymore thats bad for him. Also he has shown himself vulnerable, fighters of his type need to intimidate there opponent to disheart them and break them down. He has shown his aggression can be stoped. I think Hatton can still beat many top ten fighters but he ain't what he once was. Still he is young and if he want's to fight some more he should.

Because he got knocked out in TWO if the most embarassing knockouts of recent memory. Lets not forget that Thomas Hearns got knocked out by Hagler in 3 rounds.....nobody said he was shot, just when you get two offensive fighters in the ring together...people get knocked out. Doesnt mean hes shot, i just question whether his desire is really there anymore

I've followed Ricky Hatton's career for many years and attended a number of his fights, including those two which he lost. Both in fairly dominating fashion. What confuses me though, is why so many in the community write him off as a "bum" or "shot" because of two losses. Not only are there only TWO losses, but they were both to fighters who at the time of the fight were considered the best in the world. So what we can deduce from that is "Ok, he's not the best in the world", but there are many fighters, Luis Collazo, Miguel Cotto, Joshua Clottey, Juan Diaz, Sergio Martinez, Winky Wright, I could go on for days that ARE NOT and WILL NEVER BE the best in the world. Despite this many people support them, and very FEW people are going off about how they're shot. Why is it Ricky can't just be a good fighter who isn't quite great enough to fight the best? Why is he "SHOT" and a "BUM" because he can't beat the p4p kings? It makes no sense. Ricky won fights with his heart and his chin. He was able to walk through punches and fight on the inside. He is an underated body puncher and has some decent boxing skills. His first instinct how ever is to brawl. His defense or there lack of is what got him into trouble with Mayweather and Pacquiao. The fact that he is personable outside the ring has a poormans mentality and hangs out in pubs does wonders for him inbetween fights. The fluctuation of his weight has been down played by him giving himself the nick name Ricky Fatton. All that aside to me Ricky is a likeable guy with a crowd pleaseing style. His face first brawling technic combined with his inside fighting skills and body work took him along way. The fact that fans are calling him shot to me is not due to a lack of what he is now compared to what he used to be more than his mental state and the quality of opponents he is now facing. To me Ricky is not a shot fighter nor is he or was he ever a bum. He dramatically stepped up the level of competition and fought two of the best at their peaks. No shame in trying to be the best and failing. He can always claim he was one of the best of him time at 140lbs.....Lefty

Hatton was a decent fighter but I dont see how people think he had a crowd pleasing style. TBH the reason I dont like him is because of his fans. I saw the Hatton/Castillo fight in Vegas and the Brits booed during the US and Mexican National anthems. I thought that was in very poor taste and showed no class at all. Its no wonder Americans dont like him(as you guys are saying) after dispays like that. I don't like him because he does NOT have a 'crowd pleasing' style, because he hugs, wrestles and fights dirty, he makes nonstop excuses for losses and poor performances and finally because he weakly ceded defeat to Pacquiao by explaining, 'he's not that much better than me.' I saw a video of Junior Witter boldly challenging him and he seemed, to me at least, to be diffident and evasive about accepting it...something about Witter needing more high profile fights and entertaining performances. It seemed like smoke and mirrors to me.

Hatton was a decent fighter and beat some good fighters like Kostya Tszyu, Jose Luis Castillo, Paulie Malignaggi and Luis Collazo, and ad to that he has a fan friendly style and always wanted to fight the best. Sadly though he is even more hated by the Americans than a proven cheater Antonio Margarito, which is strange to say the least. I'm mean look around this place and you'll notice that Margacheato is way more respected than Hatton is by the Americans. The Americans claim Hatton is an overhyped bum yada yada yada... a bum doesn't become a lineal champion and two weight world champion... his two losses came against two all time greats. Ricky Hatton was a good fighter who always fought the best, and nobody is saying that he is anything more than that. Hatton was a decent fighter but I dont see how people think he had a crowd pleasing style. TBH the reason I dont like him is because of his fans. I saw the Hatton/Castillo fight in Vegas and the Brits booed during the US and Mexican National anthems. I thought that was in very poor taste and showed no class at all. Its no wonder Americans dont like him(as you guys are saying) after dispays like that.

I've followed Ricky Hatton's career for many years and attended a number of his fights, including those two which he lost. Both in fairly dominating fashion. What confuses me though, is why so many in the community write him off as a "bum" or "shot" because of two losses. Not only are there only TWO losses, but they were both to fighters who at the time of the fight were considered the best in the world. So what we can deduce from that is "Ok, he's not the best in the world", but there are many fighters, Luis Collazo, Miguel Cotto, Joshua Clottey, Juan Diaz, Sergio Martinez, Winky Wright, I could go on for days that ARE NOT and WILL NEVER BE the best in the world. Despite this many people support them, and very FEW people are going off about how they're shot. Why is it Ricky can't just be a good fighter who isn't quite great enough to fight the best? Why is he "SHOT" and a "BUM" because he can't beat the p4p kings? It makes no sense. Because he got knocked out in TWO if the most embarassing knockouts of recent memory.

Interesting. It always just pisses me off when there's talk of his comeback and people roll their eyes like "Oh god Hatton can't fight ANYONE". Give the guy some respect. World champion. Many fights, good career. He can still tangle with a lot of guys in WW and LWW.

I think Hatton gets the "bum & shot" thing alot because of the way he blows up in between fights, he doesn't have alot of big names on his resume - Castillo, Tsyu, Mayweather, Manny, Mallinaggi. he's lost 2 of those, recently, and hasn't looked as good as he did pre-floyd since. Hatton is my favorite fighter, i don't think he's a bum, i hope he's not shot, but his lifestyle may have caught up to him. I do think he's underskilled to fight the p4p kings, but what he lacks in skill he makes up for in heart and bully. (but p4p skill beats heart) I think if Hatton needs to hit more people in the nuts in early rounds, all his great fights and upsets, usually involve him retaliating and hitting someone in the nuts... he's embarassing defeats... no nut punching.... coincidence? You decide Comedian in the house! hahhahaha

At his best he was better than your average world champion, but just short of a pound 4 pound guy, that is my assesment. He was stuck between those levels, though, on any given night he was capable of beating a p4p guy basically because of his will to win and had a hard style to deal with, fast feet, fast hands, got his shots off and didn't allow the other guy to put together any shots. But on a bad night he was also capable of losing to an average world champion. In terms of him returning I think he probably still has his physical tools, power speed, but the punch resistance is gone, and I think mentally he will be shot after that pac loss, if he comes back to championship level which I have no doubt he will, he will most likely be knocked out again. He could beat paulie, kotelnik, but the belt holders will knock him out, and I think marquez would too though I give him a chance to win a decision in that fight.

I've followed Ricky Hatton's career for many years and attended a number of his fights, including those two which he lost. Both in fairly dominating fashion. What confuses me though, is why so many in the community write him off as a "bum" or "shot" because of two losses. Not only are there only TWO losses, but they were both to fighters who at the time of the fight were considered the best in the world. So what we can deduce from that is "Ok, he's not the best in the world", but there are many fighters, Luis Collazo, Miguel Cotto, Joshua Clottey, Juan Diaz, Sergio Martinez, Winky Wright, I could go on for days that ARE NOT and WILL NEVER BE the best in the world. Despite this many people support them, and very FEW people are going off about how they're shot. Why is it Ricky can't just be a good fighter who isn't quite great enough to fight the best? Why is he "SHOT" and a "BUM" because he can't beat the p4p kings? It makes no sense. In most cases they don't hate on him I believe... most here bring him up in conversations about Mayweather or Pacquiao... and will say to each other that he was a bum and not a real challenge... Ricky Hatton was an good fighter... I also think many put a little hate on him because he can laugh about himself... most seem to think that a boxer has to be all business and stuff... and if a crazy Brit comes around... who walks around in a fat-suit and call himself Ricky Fatton... they don't know how to handle it... I enjoyed Hatton... I only wished that he would not have hold so much on the inside and throw more punches at times... he just met two boxers who were simply to good for him... no blame for that I mean you could go on and list the fighters who lost to May and Pac... it's no shame

I've followed Ricky Hatton's career for many years and attended a number of his fights, including those two which he lost. Both in fairly dominating fashion. What confuses me though, is why so many in the community write him off as a "bum" or "shot" because of two losses. Not only are there only TWO losses, but they were both to fighters who at the time of the fight were considered the best in the world. So what we can deduce from that is "Ok, he's not the best in the world", but there are many fighters, Luis Collazo, Miguel Cotto, Joshua Clottey, Juan Diaz, Sergio Martinez, Winky Wright, I could go on for days that ARE NOT and WILL NEVER BE the best in the world. Despite this many people support them, and very FEW people are going off about how they're shot. Why is it Ricky can't just be a good fighter who isn't quite great enough to fight the best? Why is he "SHOT" and a "BUM" because he can't beat the p4p kings? It makes no sense. I never wrote Ricky off. Ricky Hatton still has allot in him, hell is he even 30 yet?! The reason for many people writing Ricky Hatton off is that they expected him, being 43-0 to have a great career (he did but not in their opinions) and end up undefeated beating both floyd and manny whereas people like Winky, Cotto and Clottey they don't really care what happens to them, it hurts some people seeing Ricky Hatton underachieve.

I think Hatton gets the "bum & shot" thing alot because of the way he blows up in between fights, he doesn't have alot of big names on his resume - Castillo, Tsyu, Mayweather, Manny, Mallinaggi. he's lost 2 of those, recently, and hasn't looked as good as he did pre-floyd since. Hatton is my favorite fighter, i don't think he's a bum, i hope he's not shot, but his lifestyle may have caught up to him. I do think he's underskilled to fight the p4p kings, but what he lacks in skill he makes up for in heart and bully. (but p4p skill beats heart) I think Hatton needs to hit more people in the nuts in early rounds, all his great fights and upsets, usually involve him retaliating and hitting someone in the nuts... his embarassing defeats... no nut punching.... coincidence? You decide

It's mostly Americans, they hate on all the British fighters: Haye, Khan, Calzaghe, Hatton, Hamed, Benn...the more popular the fighters are the more they hate, hence Hatton and Calzaghe getting most of the criticism. Boxingscene is an American site and US fighters aren't doing as well as they used to so it's to be expected. Edit: I should add, it's not all Americans, some give him respect and praise but they're vastly out-numbered by haters. People from other nations usually give him his credit. I am fine with Calzaghe, I like Khan and I really liked Lennox Lewis.

Too many excuses, lies & other delusional crap. He did very well for his skills or (lack of). Last thing I want is a boring safe fight with Marquez, non of them have anything more to prove. Hatton has had his day, then had another chance and we know what happened. then why was it ok for floyd to fight marquez then?