were ricky hatton and joe calzaghe overrated

[Elroy The Great]

def hatton. did he ever dominate ?

[sunny31]

I'm a boxrec warrior because I used it to look up a fighter I didn't know much about because only Calzaghe fanboi's do? Isn't that a bit extreme man? I was watching hardcore then and 168 was a dead division during Joe's reign and never heard of no Byron Mitchell, sorry. His record speaks for itself, subpar to stinky Chinatown garbage on a hot Summer day.

Mitchell was getting his shít pushed in at 4 years in, 7 years in, and after he came back he got a bigger string of losses. Sorry I didn't have that memorized to active memory. I guess I'm just a hopeless boxrec warrior. I should probably just memorize all obscure fighters so they don't call me a boxrec warrior anymore. Or maybe I can get the Joe Calzaghe Newsletter. You guys are something else man.

Yeah I saw all of that. Your mo is really questioning if I can read well? That's it, that's all you got? Man, and you can't see you're ball sniffing right now?

When you're losing to Bruno Girard you're off my radar. Never even heard of that guy, who here has heard of Bruno Girard that's not French, please stand up so we can see you.

Haha what a terrible piece of incoherent gibberish.

As a harcore boxing fan pretty much every current titlist is 'on my radar' and it was much the same in the 2000's, I apologise for remembering a multiple world champion who fought in the previous decade.

Anyway you think I'm wrong, I know your wrong. Every time I refute a point you've made you change the focus of the debate, it's boring. Good day.

[daggum]

calzaghe and ottke were in the same division at essentially the same time and both were able to get 21 title defenses. you have heard of fake news? well this was fake boxing

[Raggamuffin]

Neither was overrated.

[Citizen Koba]

or do you like them

That ain't really an either/or question man. I liked both but I always felt that Ricky was a bit overated. Joe's ceiling was never definitively reached so you can't really say he was overated, although I know there's a good few folks who still say he was.

Like most well known fighters though, it depends who you're asking: overated by some, underated by others.

[Prince Madison]

Suggest people have a look at calzaghe resume and watch some clips of him before people start calling him overrated. Educate yourselves.

[chrisJS]

Hatton overrated, Calzaghe slightly underrated.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Eubank was old, not shot and could definitely still punch regardless.

It is widely accepted that Eubank was never the same fighter after Michael Watson. While not shot, he was a shell of his former self.

[McNulty]

Haha what a terrible piece of incoherent gibberish.

As a harcore boxing fan pretty much every current titlist is 'on my radar' and it was much the same in the 2000's, I apologise for remembering a multiple world champion who fought in the previous decade.

Anyway you think I'm wrong, I know your wrong. Every time I refute a point you've made you change the focus of the debate, it's boring. Good day.

Talent is on my radar not every Moe that picks up a trinket. That's the difference between me and you. You got schooled wimp. Keep it moving and next time when you get the urge, don't talk about of the side of your neck.

I'm on the debate and striking down one of the additional components thrown at me. Now I'm being accused of switching topics? Boxec warrior, writer of incoherent rubbish, now topic changer. Looks like a lot of excuses. Hatton and Calzaghe are were overrated!

Now the dust has settled, not a lot of happy customers out there innit?

[E10Rifle]

Hatton was a bum

BoxingScene in a nutshell, there. Was it his first career loss to Floyd Mayweather, his second career loss to Manny Pacquiao or his 45-3 career record that marked him out as a bum?