Floyd Can't hurt Ricky Hatton

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

All you need for a knock-out is a snap of the jaw or a shot in the temple and its lights out. For the jaw snap you don't even have to throw it that hard.

Not to mention this:

In a close fight, a knockdown is often the difference.

Marquez - Pac. The mis-scored 1st round cost Pac the victory.

Collazo-Hatton. That 1st round flash KD was the difference on the cards. OR that non-KD of Hatton in the 12th.

Delahoya-Quartey - If Ike stayed up, he wins.

Many of you are predicting a tough, close fight. I can respect that. That means neither fighter can afford a 10-8 round.

[Mr. Ryan]

I can see this being Ricky Hatton's first and last loss. Arturo Gatti was a much bigger fighter at 140 and Floyd beat the living bejeezus out of him. There is a reason that every respected pundit and observer in the sport is picking Floyd Mayweather by a landslide. Talentwise, it's a complete mismatch.

One man, Floyd, is a product of unusual physical reflexes and experience coming together. The other, Ricky, is an import novelty fan favorite who appeals to the blue collar community. This is boxing, and the hare almost always beats the tortoise.

Hatton will take too much punishment and probably never be the same again. I'd like to be wrong, but I don't think I am.

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

At that point, Floyd was considered exciting. And HBO was beginning to bring him along. He had a much better upside then Castillo who had 4 losses at the time. This was his first fight at 135, also.

...there goes your theory on that.

Yes. Floyd was the 'star' (as it were) of that fight. But he wasn't a big name.

Your conspiracies theories pre-suppose that a) the judges had HBO's best interest in mind and actively compromised their own integrity to that end, or b) someone got to the judges before/during the fight to influence their judging.

What incentive did the judges have to intentionally and erroneously score that fight for Floyd? When Vegas judges have handed Oscar (an infinitely more "important" fighter) a couple of controversial losses. Help me here.

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

I can see this being Ricky Hatton's first and last loss. Arturo Gatti was a much bigger fighter at 140 and Floyd beat the living bejeezus out of him. There is a reason that every respected pundit and observer in the sport is picking Floyd Mayweather by a landslide. Talentwise, it's a complete mismatch.

One man, Floyd, is a product of unusual physical reflexes and experience coming together. The other, Ricky, is an import novelty fan favorite who appeals to the blue collar community. This is boxing, and the hare almost always beats the tortoise.

Hatton will take too much punishment and probably never be the same again. I'd like to be wrong, but I don't think I am.

Ry,

I don't have fight tix, but thinking about hanging at the Garden pre-fight, then walking over to Jimmy's.

[Azteca]

Yes. Floyd was the 'star' (as it were) of that fight. But he wasn't a big name.

Your conspiracies theories pre-suppose that a) the judges had HBO's best interest in mind and actively compromised their own integrity to that end, or b) someone got to the judges before/during the fight to influence their judging.

What incentive did the judges have to intentionally and erroneously score that fight for Floyd? When Vegas judges have handed Oscar (an infinitely more "important" fighter) a couple of controversial losses. Help me here.

It's not a conspiracy theory. This is boxing. Plenty of fights have been fixed. Dont even try to act like boxing has alot of integrity. especially considering the bogus fight cards, ridiculous scorecards, and corrupt ABC orgazinations.

My question to you:
Jerry Roth is notorious for giving ridiculous scorecards. Remember the stunt he pulled with Hopkins - Taylor I. He's 'compromised' his own integrity...in your words..plenty of times. He still judges on major fight cards. And he's been doing so for years.

this is BOXING. Not fcking darts where there is little or no money to be made.

What controversial losses are you speaking of, from Oscar's standpoint.

The draw with Trinidad?? Fair enough...But both fighters had an upside wether they won or lost.

The loss to Mosley. Again, Mosley was undefeated and had a huge upside.

Surely you aren't talking about Quartey/Whitaker where the bouts could of gone either way.

....I'm scratching my head here.

What's your point again???????

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

It's not a conspiracy theory. This is boxing. Plenty of fights have been fixed. Dont even try to act like boxing has alot of integrity. especially considering the bogus fight cards, ridiculous scorecards, and corrupt ABC orgazinations.

My question to you:
Jerry Roth is notorious for giving ridiculous scorecards. Remember the stunt he pulled with Hopkins - Taylor I. He's 'compromised' his own integrity...in your words..plenty of times. He still judges on major fight cards. And he's been doing so for years.

this is BOXING. Not fcking darts where there is little or no money to be made.

What controversial losses are you speaking of, from Oscar's standpoint.

The draw with Trinidad?? Fair enough...But both fighters had an upside wether they won or lost.

The loss to Mosley. Again, Mosley was undefeated and had a huge upside.

Surely you aren't talking about Quartey/Whitaker where the bouts could of gone either way.

....I'm scratching my head here.

What's your point again???????

Just when I thought you were showing a tad bit of maturity in a discussion, here goes the schoolboy stuff. Sigh.

Mosley had a "huge upside" relative to Delahoya? Mosley's career was in the dumps when he got that Oscar rematch. He hadn't won a fight in a long-ass time and was well-off teh radar and the p4p lists.

"undefeated"? Shane had been throttled by Forrest.

Dude, you are essentially saying tha either somebody paid off the judges, or the judges independently-yet-concurrently made the business decision on behalf of the sport that a Shane (or Floyd) win was what the sport needed.

And Oscar lost to Tito in a controversial decision. That wasn't a draw.

You basically put up a post full of factual errors and then went crazy with the "owned" button. Not a good look for you, mijita.

[Don Johnson]

Hatton won't get hurt by one punch, it'll be an accumalation of punishment leading into the inevitable TKO. He reallly shoulda got another fight at 147 before fighting Floyd. Maybe a rematch with Collazo or something. I don't like PBF but, I'm pretty positive he's going to win. I'm looking for someone at my school dumb enough to put $40 on Hatton.

[Don Johnson]

Just when I thought you were showing a tad bit of maturity in a discussion, here goes the schoolboy stuff. Sigh.

Mosley had a "huge upside" relative to Delahoya? Mosley's career was in the dumps when he got that Oscar rematch. He hadn't won a fight in a long-ass time and was well-off teh radar and the p4p lists.

"undefeated"? Shane had been throttled by Forrest.

Dude, you are essentially saying tha either somebody paid off the judges, or the judges independently-yet-concurrently made the business decision on behalf of the sport that a Shane (or Floyd) win was what the sport needed.

And Oscar lost to Tito in a controversial decision. That wasn't a draw.

You basically put up a post full of factual errors and then went crazy with the "owned" button. Not a good look for you, mijita.

dude wtf was that guy talkin about. Maybe he's trippin on Acid or something. Acid is popular with the kids these days.

[Fox McCloud]

Anyone else find it strange that Trinidad had plenty of claim that he won the De La Hoya fight but Mayweather Jr. could not have possibly won the first Castillo fight from any objective judges's standpoint?

Seems a little biased Azteca.

[DIOS DOMINICANO]

dude wtf was that guy talkin about. Maybe he's trippin on Acid or something. Acid is popular with the kids these days.

Unbelievable.

Just some fat kid with a computer.