Franko6909

Ok fellas before you jump all over me and call me an idoit read the entire post. I saw the fight and yes I was amazed at how badily Oscar got beat. I was thinking we were going to see a good fight competitive and if anyone was going to be handing out punishment it would be De la Hoya handing out more then he was taking. But Manny showed us that speed is the main factor in boxing. If you have the advantage with hands speed and you carry some power you can dominate just about anybody no matter what the weight class. manny didn't just look faster but he looked light years faster on Saturday night. I kept telling myself I was dreaming I even pinched myself to make sure I was awake. I had to stand up after the 6th round and turn away from the TV because I couldn't belive what I was seeing. It was like Manny almost didn't want to finish him he would pull back off the ropes and waive Oscar in. Like as if he was asking Oscar bring the fight to me. Many think that if Oscar had fought Cotto or Marg they would have disposed of Oscar just as easily. I beg to differ and I will tell you why. Oscar main issue Saturday night was speed. Lightening fast greasy speed just like Mickey said in Rocky II. If you can catch this chicken you can catch Creed. Well I bet Nacho didn't have Oscar chaing any chickens during his trainin camp. Point is Marg is a come forward face first puncher who doesn't punch that hard but throws alot of punches. Oscar could out box Marg for a few rounds and put up more of a fight then he showed us this past Saturday. Heck he might even be able to bet marg if he got Marg to agree to fight him at 154. marg would nver bounce on his feet and jump around the ring on his way in like PACMAN did. marg would be getting tagged with Oscars jab. End point is although I think marg would beat Oscar he would have had more a fight on his nads then PACMAN did. Cotto same thought here is not as fast as PACMAN. Doesnt not move around as much on his way in. Don't think Oscar could out box him as easily as Marg but I think he would be easier to hit then PAC was Saturday ngiht.All in all I think it would have been a more competitive fight than we saw Saturday when the so Called Dream Match took place ...More like Oscar's Night mare.....Lefty I understand what you're saying here, but when a fighter is in the twighlight of his career and he takes a systematic beating like the one De La Hoya did against Pacquaio then the natural reaction is to state that he should retire, because no one wants to see a fighter take a beating like that. However, there are obvious factors to consider i.e. How did De La Hoya boil down to the weight? Was he taking anything to aid the weight loss? Why did he not put more weight back on after the weigh in? In my opinion this was a 'no win situation' fight for De La Hoya, and other than the $$$$ you wouldn't qualify De La Hoya as being desperate for i couldn't understand why the fight was made, especially considering that there could have been other fights made at more of a natural weight for De La Hoya. My reasoning behind this is that had De La Hoya beat Pacquiao then he would not have received any real credit for doing so because people would have said that Manny was too small, and De La Hoya should have faced a fighter who didn't have to jump two weight divisions... and so on. People also said that the beating De La Hoya took reminded them of the beating Ali suffered at the hands of Larry Holmes, but in my opinion it was more shocking because no one expected Ali to beat Holmes (unless their heads were in the clouds) and many didn't want the fight to happen. The signs of decline were obvious in Ali back then and he hadn't fought for something like 2-3 years (i think) when he fought Larry Holmes who was the best young heavyweight in the world at the time. The signs of decline haven't been as glaringly obvious in De La Hoya and he's fought once a year since 2006 which included the excellent performance against Mayorga, the split decision loss to Mayweather Jnr (which many claim De La Hoya should have won), and the laboured performance against Forbes. There's a saying that claims you're only as good as your last performance, but i doubt that many expected Pacquiao to beat De La Hoya so convicingly. Freddie Roach was obviously one of those that did expect his fighter to beat De La Hoya convincingly... Prior to the fight he stated that De La Hoya couldn't pull the trigger any more and he repeated that after the fight which proves it wasn't just hype... Roach is obviously a knowlegable man and i'm inclined to agree with him because i don't see why Oscar should continue to take risks at 35 years of age, but i also don't think that he will want to retire on the back of such a loss.

50/50? No way man, the vast majority had Lacy KOing Joe within a couple of rounds. Of 24 BoxingScene staff, for example, only 8 had Joe winning, and only ONE of those predicted the correct outcome accurately (Mr. TK Stewart, give yourself a pat on the back). I also remember talking to many people in the UK about the fight before it happened. Hardly anyone at all gave Joe a chance. It wasn't even close to 50/50. And all this bullshit about Jones being shot? People need to get real. What is their definition of "shot", I wonder? Jones had Calzaghe down in the first round and was still throwing powerful punches 11 rounds later. Jones ain't what he used to be, but he is far less shot than people think. Joe Calzaghe would have given Jones a great challenge at ANY point in either mans career. People say Jones would have crushed Joe in his prime. **** off! Back in the day Joe threw just as many punches but he had twice as much power, and Jones was very hurt and bloodied by Joe's "slaps". No one will ever convince me that Jones would have beaten Joe, in fact I am sure Joe would beat Jones anytime, and that's why Jones would rather fight Clinton Woods instead. As for Hopkins, he wanted nothing to do with Joe and chose to fight Morade Hakkar instead (and for less money than he was offered to fight Joe). Some people will never get it though. When he is motivated, Joe completely owns and humiliates all of these guys. I agree with much of what you say Bro, but when i stated opinion was divided 50-50 for the Lacy fight - that was what i had read and heard from so called boxing experts... You say it was different on here and i believe you because i don't think that Calzaghe gets the credit he deserves from many on here. In time he will get the full credit that he deserves... but i'm sure people will go on to say he ducked Dawson, and Froch when he retires.

Lets look at this. He beat an overhyped bum in Lacy. No big deal at all. Ermmm. Kessler a bum who hasnt won a noticable fight all his career. An extremely shot Jones. Lost to Hopkins. HOF material? No chance at all. It's strange how fighter's labelled the next best thing by so called boxing experts suddenly become 'overhyped' when they are beaten as comprehensively as Lacy was beaten by Calzaghe. Opinion was divided 50-50 when Lacy was due to fight Calzaghe... In fact some were saying that Joe was going to get bashed up by the younger, stronger American... But Joe outclassed, and exposed Lacy and gets no credit for it! With regards to Kessler, i actually think he's a very good fighter which time will go on to tell as he still has a while left in the fight game... Again, opinion was divided prior to the Calzaghe/Kessler fight yet Calzaghe still gets accused of ducking people... Kessler and Lacy were two of the best Super Middleweights around at the time Calzaghe fought them so how can he be accused of ducking anyone? Both Hopkins and Jones Jnr are obviously past their best but i think that Joe is too. Calzaghe/Hopkins was a close fight but in my opinion Joe deserved a majority, rather than split decision because other than the knock down, Hopkins didn't do anything major and was spoiling at times and looking to steal breathers and rounds... I give Joe plenty of credit for winning that fight because it certainly wasn't easy and Hopkins proved he still has something in the tank by going on to beat Pavlik.

he hasnt been a fighter since the hopkins ko He came back from the Hopkins loss to destroy Ricardo Mayorga! Plenty said that De La Hoya was past it, and Mayorga could end his career before that fight, and although Mayorga has obvious limitations it was still an excellent performance from Oscar. I'm not going to make comparisons regarding greatness, but De La Hoya is (or perhaps was) a great fighter.

I think i speak for a lot of us when i say: Shut up Joe and retire. I don't think that there is much wrong with what joe said regarding De La Hoya, but i doubt it that boxing will ever die... True, it's probably no where near what it once was but there are definitely fighters out there to keep the public interested, and there are exciting fighters coming through.

I have pointed out numerous times Joe expressed a desire to fight Pavlik BEFORE he fights Jones. I posted a video thread a while back, where you here the words straight from the horses mouth. Listen to Joe at 7:45 of this vid, where he is asked if he wants Jones, and says explicitly "I'm more interested in fighting Pavlik to be honest". This is before his shit performance against Hopkins of course, and the demolition of Gary Lockett. His tune has changed quite a bit, hasn't it? All the bullshit Enzo and Joe saying "Pavlik doesn't deserve the fight with Joe", gimme a fucking break. Two months ago they were all gung ho about a Pavlik fight, until they realized Joe can't even beat a 43 year old convincingly, and realized up close how good Pavlik really is... So you're claiming that Joe Calzaghe is avoiding Pavlik based on his demolition of Gary Lockett? Who's Gary Lockett ever fought to give him credence as a creditable opponent for Pavlik... Ryan Rhodes? I don't think so. Calzaghe would have made short work of Lockett had he fought him, but you criticise him for not being at his best against Bernard Hopkins!!! Although Hopkins is past his best he is still very capable of making any fighter look bad, and Joe isn't used to going looking for a fighter, but he had to do that against Hopkins. As i stated in my last post, Joe Calzaghe's last fight has been made to generate as much money as possible. I have absolutely no doubt about that, and i have no doubt that Joe or Enzo Calzaghe don't fear losing an undefeated record against Kelly Pavlik, and i pick the best Super Middleweight in the World to beat the best middleweight in the world, no problem. Let's not forget how close Jermain Taylor came to beating Pavlik, and Taylor isn't half the fighter that Calzaghe is in my opinion. Add to the fact that Calzaghe has outclassed two opponents who were labelled as legitimate dangers to his undefeated record in Lacy and Kessler and it kind of makes the assumption that Calzaghe is ducking Pavlik look stupid.

It's hilarious how NO calzaghe fans are posting on this thread. First of all, i don't blame Calzaghe for wanting to make as much money as he can before he retires, and whether we like it or not he is still making that money against creditable opponents i.e. Bernard Hopkins and Roy Jones Junior. Obviously both of those fighters are far past their best, but would Joe make as much or more money fighting Pavlik, or Froch? ... No he wouldn't. Although Calzaghe's last two fights (one still to be confirmed) have been purely about Money in my opinion, it was also important to have wins over Hopkins and Jones Junior on his record, but when looking back at Joe Calzaghe's career in years to come, will there be much emphasis placed on wins over two 'past it' legends of the sport? ... I think not. Creditable opponents, yes, but nowhere near what they once were. I think Joe will get a lot more credit for his wins over Lacy and Kessler, and rightly so, because they were legimitate threats, and opinion was divided pretty much 50-50 when Calzaghe faced both of those fighters. Personally i would prefer Joe Calzaghe to face either Froch or Pavlik in his last fight, but i don't think he's ducking either of them in fear of losing his undefeated record. I think that the financial package isn't right for facing either of them, when he could be getting much more for facing Roy Jones Junior in his last fight. However, i think Jones Junior can still represent a threat to Joe because if Hopkins can put Joe down then surely Jones Junior is capable of upsetting Joe's game plan. I just hope that making this fight for the money doesn't backfire on Joe.

Lol the only person falling was Lewis on his stool. You immature dumbass, Im not American first off, and second that uppercut had as much effect on Vitali as Byrd's best shot on Tua's whiskers. LOL seriously who the hell do you think your fooling? I have seen Lewis vs Klitschko more times than I can count, and I say this will all honesty that uppercut caused no danger what so ever on Vitali's part. Now the right hand delivered in round 2 by Vitali, had Lewis out on his feet, and no one could argue that, not even you. The right hand delivered by Klitschko in round two was indeed a great shot, but it didn't get Lewis out of there... I don't want to get drawn into a debate about slugfest's, and punch statistics etc, as although Klitschko's face was a bloody mess it doesn't necessarily mean he lost a 'slugfest!' Cuts in boxing can happen any time, but some fighters are more prone to cuts than others (Alan Minter & Henry Cooper spring to mind). If you get cuts like the one's Klitschko suffered against Lennox Lewis it doesn't really matter how far ahead on points you are unless there are only one or two rounds remaining, which there wasn't in that fight. Therefore, Vitali Klitschko had to knock out Lennox Lewis and he didn't do that. Lennox took advantage of the situation and got the win, simple as that. People can go on about Vitali retiring Lennox Lewis all they want, but i don't see why Lewis would have to be ashamed of the fact that he did seem to age in the Klitschko fight. Fighters will always claim that they are in great shape prior to a fight, but at the age of 37-38 time can suddenly catch up with you, and Lennox clearly wasn't in the shape he liked to think he was, or would have people believe. Personally i don't see the point in going on about Klitschko retiring Lewis when Lennox was clearly looking past his best and retirement should have been imminent in any case, but Klitschko still lost the fight, and although it's not a fight i've watched a lot, as far as i recall i was favouring Lewis for the knock out more so than Klitschko at the time as i thought that Lewis had took Klitschko's best shots, and if the fight had went any further Klitschko would have struggled to see shots coming from Lewis due to his eye being in such a mess, and that's an obvious danger against a big puncher like Lewis. However, the fight was stopped at the right time as Klitschko could have ended up seriously injured if it did go further. It wasn't a great performance by Lewis by any means, but sometimes great fighters still get the win without looking so great.

why the arguements?..its obvious vitali was winning the fight....but he didnt win the fight..which is the main thing. I think with a full training camp behind lewis..he wouldnt have looked so sluggish,and i think the fight would have gone longer,and lewis would have got a TKO in the latter rounds. Thats not to take anything away from vitali...he really took the fight to Lewis. One of the best heavyweight fights of the past decade...u could even put 2 decades into that....excelelnt..loved the 2nd round...v.exciting Vitali was winning the fight, but it was no foregone conclusion that he would have gone to win the fight by a landslide majority decision, as some would claim. In my opinion Lennox won rounds 3 & 6, and there could be arguments to score the 4th round even, therefore, with 6 rounds still remaining in the fight i also don't see the point in arguing about it. Although Lennox was past his best, and not in the greatest of shape, it is possible that Vitali Klitschko would have drawn him into that type of slugfest at any stage of his career, however, Lennox still got the win, and IMO, he was the more likely to score a knock out due to the severe cuts suffered by Klitschko.

I seen the fight recently. gotta say Calzaghe gave Lacy a boxing lesson. Lacy was too focus in hitting the left hook that he even did try to set it up or jab couple of times. It a deseved win. As for the crowd that night Lacy's GF was the loudest of the crowd. She is the check in the front seat shout. the whole crowd couldnt make the same noise as she did. good effort on cheering :D . Calzaghe GF is beatiful but she looks like she got too many plastic surgey and maybe be getting more after this win :D The Calzaghe/Lacey build up reminded me a lot of all the talk prior to the Benn/McClellan fight, and IMO McClellan was a better fighter than Lacy is e.g. there was some substance behind the claims that McClellan was 'the next best thing' but Lacy was being hyped up on the back of victories over the likes of Sheika, and Reid. I do think that Lacy is a good fighter, but at that time i knew he wouldn't beat Calzaghe.

Well he holds the WBC belt and is rated number 2 in the ring ratings. he has had a few bad performances but did well in his last fight. If ricky doesn't fight him he cant claim to be the no1 in the division as he wont be fighting the no2 imo. I think a fight with Witter is more possible now then it has ever been, but i think Hatton may go for Malignaggi next, because let's be honest, although Hatton claims that who he fights has only ever been about the glory, the financial package always plays an important part, especially when you are looking to have 2 or 3 more fights and then thinking of calling it quits. There'll be no complaints if Hatton takes a fight with Malignaggi and i'm sure it will be more financially rewarding than a fight with Witter, but i'm also sure that the majority of british fight fans would prefer to see Hatton fight Witter... More importantly, who is that chick on your post?

Because i picked Hatton to beat Witter doesnt mean he hasnt ducked him, He has ducked him for 6 years and counting..Please tell me when Hatton was fighting Bums on his WBU he didnt duck Witter? You can try and use Maywaether name all you want but the fact remains that he ducked Witter..He had load of opportinuty to fight Witter but he end up with jokes like Maussa,Pedersen etc am not a fool like some of his dumbass fan would are in love with Hatton, I have been to 4 live fights of his including the on where Witter gatecrash Hatton's interview and told him how he would KO..Hatton ducked Witter peiod accept it and move on..Hatton is doing well for him self but he Avoid Witter like the plague Good for you, you've been to four live fights of Hatton's. Like i've stated in a previous post, i'm sure that the fight fans in England would relish a Hatton V Witter fight (that applies to me too), but you have to be open minded about these things. Claiming Hatton has ducked Witter for 6 years when he has just fought the P4P best fighter in the world makes you sound foolish. Yes Hatton fought Urango, Collazo, Castillo etc, so what? Why was Witter more deserving as an opponent than those fighters? His career record isn't anything to get excited about... It wasn't back when Hatton was fighting Urango, Collazo, Castillo etc, and it still isn't now. IMO Hatton will look to arrange a fight with Malignaggi next. Not because he is ducking Witter, but because that fight is more appealing on the wider scale. However, i have stated in a previous post that a Hatton V Witter fight is now more a possibility than ever, and i stand by that. Ray Hatton has revealed that Ricky Hatton will hopefully be fighting in England next so you never know, he may indeed fight Witter and put your 'Ducking' claim to rest.

I think he knows Witter has the power to beat him, Witter is very awkward and has all the advantages over Ricky like reach,Jab etc... There is a reason why Team Hatton Has avoid this fight for 6 years counting now. They have made excuses after excuses because they Know Witter doesnt have the fanbase to push through a fight with Hatton, I mean you started this thread questioning why anyone will even question why Hatton is scared of Witter which says alot.. He has ducked Witter so many times now it has become an embarrassment even to the Hatton nutlickers who try to defend him with BS like he just fought the best in the world..He doesnt have fight Witter if his next opponent are in the high class but when his fighting Urango and Maussa for God sake..Now thats really ducking. You state in this post that Witter has all the advantages over Ricky like reach, jab etc... But in a later post you claim that you'd pick Hatton to beat Witter! The bottom line is that Hatton isn't scared of Witter... That is a silly accusation. Like it or not, you cannot claim that Hatton avoids anybody when he has just fought the P4P best fighter in the world! It's not always easy to make a fight happen, and i'm sure that plenty of fight fans would love to see Hatton V Witter, but claiming that Hatton is ducking Witter because a fight with him hasn't happened is narrow minded as far as i'm concerned. I'd be inclined to agree with your opinion had Hatton not shared a ring with Kostya and Mayweather, but he has.

Where were you when Jay Nady didn't let Ruiz "fight his fight" by hugging Roy Jones all night long in 2003? Hatton's style is just as illegal as Ruiz's so where were you guys when that went down? I didn't hear anybody crying over Ruiz being told what to do by a ref. If Ruiz was forced to fight within the rules and nobody complained, then stop crying that Cortez made Hatton fight within the rules. Mayweather was a just as guilty as Hatton regarding foul tactics, and there is no excusing Cortez. Some of his refereeing was diplorable.

I wonder what would have happened. Would there be more of an outcry? I think he would probably have a lawsuit on his hands by now. Race relations would have been all over Calzaghe like the proverbial rash if he'd have made a racist comment towards Hopkins. Britain simply doesn't accept racism, but whether people like it or not, racism towards a white person tends to get brushed under the carpet a lot. If Joe Calzaghe had said, 'I'll never lose to a black man!' he'd have been vilified in Britain and it would have made the front page on the newspapers, and although what Hopkins said certainly isn't acceptable, the vilification clearly isn't the same. I'm most definitely against Racism of any form, and what Hopkins said was Racist, tongue in cheek or not.

i think the only thing that cortez didnt do enough was warn hatton for excessive holding. mills lane would have taken points for holding. Give it a F*cking rest! Mayweather was just as guilty with regards to holding. Despite everything though, Mayweather was the better fighter, end of.

team mayweather-ref got into hatton head by not letting him fight The bottom line is it would had to have been an outstanding performance for Hatton to beat Mayweather, and that's despite the usually top notch Joe Cortez having a bad night. There is no doubt in my mind that the occasion got to Hatton a little bit, but he didn't do himself any favours with his Gung-Ho approach... That sort of approach was never going to work on Mayweather. I was in favour of the consistent pressure that Hatton was talking about applying prior to the fight, but it just wasn't controlled. He was attacking in straight lines, not using any angles, and not going to the body as often as he should have done... Basically, he was head hunting and looking to knock Mayweather out, especially after the cut. Although i rate Hatton a very good fighter, he does have flaws that Mayweather exposed further (although they have been evident throughout his career, even in his best performance against Tszyu), and i really believe that questions have to be asked of his trainer Billy Graham. My reason being that Hatton has natural talent that he hasn't developed. Again (as in another of my posts) that may sound daft due to the fact that Hatton was unbeaten prior to fighting Mayweather, but i honestly believe that Graham is lacking something tactically & technically.

Its not an excuse, its just a possibility...Hatton was not this big when he fought Tzu.... Although i do think the occasion got the better of Hatton a little bit, i think that Mayweather proved beyond any shadow of doubt that he is the better fighter. Hindsight would even tell you that he'd have won the fight behind closed doors in front of one man & his dog, and although Hatton was desperate to put on a great performance for himself and his followers it didn't materialise because Mayweather was much better than him. Hatton didn't do himself any favours with his gung-ho approach either.

What I find funny is how Hatton and his people and fans keep complaining then at the beginning or end of the complaint they all say "take nothing away from Mayweather". But by complaining about the fight you are taking away from Mayweather. Thats like saying to a man "no disrespect but you are a bitch" or saying to a woman " no disrespect you are a whore, slut and a cunt". Just because you say no disrespect doesn't mean you aren't being disrespectful. All these bullshit complaints are actually taking away from the wonderful job PBF did. People need to man up take the loss regroup and get back up in the saddle. Shit right now Hatton and his fans are basically looking and acting like Ricky's girl was after the fight or whenever she was ballin crying. YALL NEED TO GO DOUCHE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think the majority of Hatton's fans realised that it would have to take a monumental effort for him to beat Mayweather. The simple fact of the matter is that Mayweather is the better fighter, but that doesn't mean that you can't have an opinion regarding the loss for Hatton without it sounding like your detracting something from the performance that Mayweather gave e.g. IMO Joe Cortez had a terrible night, and was needlessly seperating the fighters at times, and Hatton was always going to get caught because of the gung-ho approach that he adopted, but Mayweather performed exceptionally, no question.

Hatton was doing a solid job early. Granted he wasn't winning rounds but he was doing a solid job establishing his pace, and pressuring Floyd. The problem is he wasn't landing or throwing enough. There were a lot of times when he could've landed something big but he'd opt to walk in and wrestle Floyd to the ropes. Either he didn't have a strategy or he completely abandoned it early in the fight. Mayweather never wore down even with the constrant clinching/wrestling routine. Had Hatton have had an actual gameplan, who knows. But landing 6 punches a round and walking into everything your opponet throws will not win you a fight. I posted this on another thread.... The bottom line is it would had to have been an outstanding performance for Hatton to beat Mayweather, and that's despite the usually top notch Joe Cortez having a bad night. There is no doubt in my mind that the occasion got to Hatton a little bit, but he didn't do himself any favours with his Gung-Ho approach... That sort of approach was never going to work on Mayweather. I was in favour of the consistent pressure that Hatton was talking about applying prior to the fight, but it just wasn't controlled. He was attacking in straight lines, not using any angles, and not going to the body as often as he should have done... Basically, he was head hunting and looking to knock Mayweather out, especially after the cut. Although i rate Hatton a very good fighter, he does have flaws that Mayweather exposed further (although they have been evident throughout his career, even in his best performance against Tszyu), and i really believe that questions have to be asked of his trainer Billy Graham. My reason being that Hatton has natural talent that he hasn't developed. Again (as in another of my posts) that may sound daft due to the fact that Hatton was unbeaten prior to fighting Mayweather, but i honestly believe that Graham is lacking something tactically & technically.

Are Hopkins fans blind? How they say that Hopkins landed the cleaner shots? well it could be if your head is part of your fists, or if faking 2 low blows is part of your ring generalships. Joe didn't won pretty but he won clearly! 116-111 Calzaghe Hopkins did land clean shots, but the simple fact is he didn't land enough of them, and he couldn't take advantage of the knock down in the first round because his negative tactics allowed Calzaghe back into the fight. Hopkins used every trick in the book... He used his head, clinched at every opportunity, and played for time... Calzaghe was the aggressor, forced the fight and deserved a unanimous (rather than split) decision IMO. Yes Calzaghe did land a low blow, but i won't criticise Hopkins for taking advantage of the situation. The low blow was no way near forcefull enough to warrant a five minute breather, but Hopkins used his nouse and got himself a breather, and at 43 years of age who can blame him for that? He went on to win that round IMO, but that was one of only three rounds that i think he won.

you guys say its impossible for hatton to win but what happens if hatton lands a bodyshot like he did against castillo? I don't see Hatton landing that type of shot against Mayweather, but you never know in Boxing. However, Mayweather is an exceptional defensive fighter, therefore, shots like the one Hatton landed on Castillo won't be easy to find against Mayweather. I give Hatton immense credit for taking the fight with Mayweather, but it was a logical step. Many on this site claimed that Hatton was ducking Mayweather, but i never thought that was the case. However, Hatton realises that Mayweather will most definitely be the biggest test he will have in his career, and although i think Hatton can win the fight, in the back of my mind i can see Mayweather making him look bad, and picking his shots... I hope not.

There's no evidence to suggest that early humans were black or had deeply pigmented skin. Early proto humans were most likely very hairy, so would have little use for skin pigmentation. Black people evolved from the same ancestors as white people, and evolved just as much. Suggesting that white people evolved from black people is if anything more offensive to black people than it is to white people, and is likely to be erronious. By the way, that nezahualcoyotl should have been left on his mother's chin. What a loser. This thread is absurd! I can't believe how idiotic some people can be! To begin with, Mayweather acts and talks like a dickhead in every press conference... Fact! He obviously thinks trash talking will sell more tickets etc, but this is part of who he is, and we shouldn't really expect him to act in any other way, but that's precisely what it is... An act! Sure, Ricky Hatton may feel a little fear, and there's nothing wrong with that as he is going to be fighting a great fighter, but the whole Mayweather act is geared towards intimidating an opponent. However, he won't intimidate Hatton, much as he never intimidated Oscar De La Hoya. Those of you who believe that Mayweather won't fear Hatton are delusional. Fighters do have fear as it is a natural human reaction... It's how they use the fear that counts.

Just read an interview that he had on ***houseboxing. He says some off the wall things. Even goes as far as to say that Oscar owes his fame and notoriety to Floyd because Oscar became more well known after fighting Floyd. I personally see it the other way around. FLOYD became more well known, and owes his current star status to Oscar. I don't think one owes the other anything! They're both great in their own right. De La Hoya is probably more liked by the average fan because he doesn't trash talk.

I am posting fact, with video evidence to back up my stance. If somebody says something idiotic like "Oscar was more hurt against vargas than hatton was against collazo", I am going to dispute that stupid shit. If somebody says that Hatton wasn't badly hurt late in the Collazo fight, then I will pull up my vid archive to prove otherwise. I watch alot of fights. I know what I saw. So Hatton was hurt against Collazo! Did he come through that to get the decision? Yes he did.

You mean the Freddie Pendleton who was 38 years old and had TWENTY FIVE (25!!) LOSSES?? THAT GUY? DO YOU MEAN VINCE PHILLIPS WHO WAS FORTY (40!!) YEARS OLD? They were fights that would have aided the progress of Hatton at the time, not great fighters by any means... That much is obvious, but like i've stated, every fighter has a padded record to some extent.

Are the later rounds called "the championship" rounds? I guess we all have different standards. DOES A TRUE CHAMPION END A FIGHT BY CLUTCHING ON FOR DEAR LIFE? Get over your obsession with the Hatton/Collazo fight... We've all established that Hatton was hurt in the later rounds, so what! Any good fighter would've tested Hatton at the weight, and Collazo is a good fighter after all. Hatton did struggle in the last round against Urango, and i think he may struggle down the stretch against Mayweather, therefore, if he is to win the fight on points, IMO he has to do it in the first 8-9 rounds.

Junior Witter fought zab Judah, Demarcus corley and Vivian harris. That isn't the very top level, but that is pretty good stuff. I must question your statement about Hatton's record. Thomas Damgaard was 37-0, Gianluca branco was 32-0-1, mario Veit was 45-1. My point is that when an american or mexican has a great record, it typically means something. When a euro fighter has a great record, there may still be a massive question mark there. We won't know what Hatton is until he faces a prime, elite fighter. He does that for the first time on Dec 8th. He can win and prove himself, or he can lose and become just another overrated Euro fighter with a padded record. You're correct about Damgaard, Branco, and Veit, and there are more of that Calibre of fighter who you could put in that 'bracket' but you cannot doubt the calibre of many of Hatton's opponents which brings me back to my original opinion... You don't go 43-0 unless you are a very good fighter... I perhaps should have named a few of Hatton's opponents to back up that opinion, but do i have to?

hatton fans always make excusses for him, it wasn't a problem for cotto or mayweather to move up in weight and still dominate but hatton can't because he is not on the same level as floyd or cotto I'm not making excuses, and perhaps you're right with regards to Mayweather and Cotto, i haven't claimed that he is on the same level as either of those fighters when moving up in weight, but there is the distinct possibility that he just hasn't got it in his make-up to jump through the weight divisions.

Franko, You are commenting on something that you weren't in on originally. The discussion was about Ricky's chin. Hyena said that Ricky's chin was just as good as Oscar's. I was disputing that. And I used the LC fight to support my contention. Now if YOU also think that Hatton's chin is equal/better than Delahoya's, please let me know that. Otherwise, why are you even commenting? It's a hard comaprison to make, but i've no doubt that De La Hoya has one of the best chin's in the business. I will comment how and when i want to, it's a discussion forum, and i was giving my opinion. Sure Hatton was hurt against Collazo, but he still got the win and IMO Hatton was no where near ready for the weight against Collazo. He was stupid taking the fight, and i thought that he would struggle down the stretch.