But you would completely give Hatton credit for a 116-112 victory....right?
Didn't you agree to a "no excuses" pact?
Here is the flaw in your logic: You have said repreatedly that Hatton has the STYLE to beat Mayweather. Hatton, Graham, Oscar, et al have said that Hatton has the STYLE to beat Mayweather. So we ALL acknowledge that this fight is a "clash of styles".
So if Mayweather is able to come in and do the SAME thing to Hatton that he has done to others, then that means that FMJ was able to impose his style (essentially, his "will") on Hatton.
In much the way that Kelly Pavlik has beaten the past three guys the SAME way, Mayweather would have beaten the past three guys the SAME way. They were both able to control the fight, preventing the opponent from doing what he wants, and imparting his will onto the opponent.
You must give Mayweather full, 100% and complete credit for 115-113 x 3. Or just admit that you are biased.
Didn't you agree to a "no excuses" pact?
Here is the flaw in your logic: You have said repreatedly that Hatton has the STYLE to beat Mayweather. Hatton, Graham, Oscar, et al have said that Hatton has the STYLE to beat Mayweather. So we ALL acknowledge that this fight is a "clash of styles".
So if Mayweather is able to come in and do the SAME thing to Hatton that he has done to others, then that means that FMJ was able to impose his style (essentially, his "will") on Hatton.
In much the way that Kelly Pavlik has beaten the past three guys the SAME way, Mayweather would have beaten the past three guys the SAME way. They were both able to control the fight, preventing the opponent from doing what he wants, and imparting his will onto the opponent.
You must give Mayweather full, 100% and complete credit for 115-113 x 3. Or just admit that you are biased.
Comment