Hatton vs DLH

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Shattered Jaw
    Undisputed Champion
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • Apr 2009
    • 5131
    • 261
    • 141
    • 11,649

    #21
    Originally posted by shade darkar
    i doubt that. hatton aint fighting at 154. he struggled at 47, never mind 54! he is way too small.
    Well then this fight won't happen then. DLH surely would not drop below 154. His fight with Forbes left him in bad enough shape.... his fight with Manny was just plain dangerous.

    The actual reason Hatton struggled at 147 is because of the people he fought there. Collazo is a decent boxer (better than HBO paper boy Berto in my opinion) and Mayweather.... is just, well, Mayweather. Hatton is very comparable in size to Cotto except Cotto does well at WW because he has some actual skills rather than just mauling everything in sight.

    Comment

    • shade darkar
      Undisputed Champion
      Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
      • Apr 2009
      • 6460
      • 227
      • 337
      • 12,996

      #22
      Originally posted by Shattered Jaw
      Well then this fight won't happen then. DLH surely would not drop below 154. His fight with Forbes left him in bad enough shape.... his fight with Manny was just plain dangerous.

      The actual reason Hatton struggled at 147 is because of the people he fought there. Collazo is a decent boxer (better than HBO paper boy Berto in my opinion) and Mayweather.... is just, well, Mayweather. Hatton is very comparable in size to Cotto except Cotto does well at WW because he has some actual skills rather than just mauling everything in sight.
      yes but it wasnt just that the boxers at 47 hatton fought were good, they were also bigger than him, collazo and mayweather were both taller and had a much longer reach than hatton. I think if you look at any of todays welterweights they are all bigger than hatton. maulling/pressure is an under rated skill IMO.
      Last edited by shade darkar; 09-18-2009, 09:06 AM.

      Comment

      • D-MiZe
        Banned
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Mar 2009
        • 25073
        • 1,061
        • 371
        • 75,542

        #23
        Originally posted by shade darkar
        it makes sense as far as money is concerned, but thats it. its not going to enhance either guys record that much, and at what weight would it take place aswell! de la hoya is a super welterweight and hatton a junior. de la hoya would be draining himself again to make 147, and hatton doesnt like 147. i just cant see it happening.
        But the point is,

        Hatton will only return in a big fight against someone. DLH would be a big name on his record even after Pacman beat him. On the other hand, DLH realises that this fight is very winnable.

        Catch weight?

        Comment

        • shade darkar
          Undisputed Champion
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Apr 2009
          • 6460
          • 227
          • 337
          • 12,996

          #24
          Originally posted by Demise
          But the point is,

          Hatton will only return in a big fight against someone. DLH would be a big name on his record even after Pacman beat him. On the other hand, DLH realises that this fight is very winnable.

          Catch weight?
          well its possible but i just cant see it happening. catchweights are wrong IMO and seem to cause alot of controversy as shown yesterday! besides oscar would probably want the catchweight over 150.

          Comment

          • Addition
            Undisputed Champion
            Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
            • Dec 2007
            • 8534
            • 306
            • 140
            • 20,828

            #25
            Originally posted by Demise
            But the point is,

            Hatton will only return in a big fight against someone. DLH would be a big name on his record even after Pacman beat him. On the other hand, DLH realises that this fight is very winnable.

            Catch weight?
            Catchweight of 160?

            Comment

            Working...
            TOP