Thread: Ricky Hatton To Be Stripped of IBF Title

so looks like he is going be stripped of title and hatton is concentrating on castillo bout in june good idea

Why is he going to be stripped, he's only just won it?

Originally Posted by bilbo

Why is he going to be stripped, he's only just won it?

If this was known before the fight was made, Im sure the fight would not of happened....

Originally Posted by bilbo

Why is he going to be stripped, he's only just won it?

The report noted that Hatton must face the winner of Sunday's scrap between Australian fighters, Naoufel Ben Rabah and Lovemore Ndou, taking place at the Sydney Olympic Park in Australia. The IBF has ordered that he must commit to face the winner within 90-days or vacate his title.

Originally Posted by miles

Originally Posted by bilbo

Why is he going to be stripped, he's only just won it?

If this was known before the fight was made, Im sure the fight would not of happened....

Exactly. The IBF just made him fight Urango and now wants him to fight the guy Urango just got the decision over. Hey Rabah just beat Arturo Morua. Hatton better make plans to fight him too

Sounds like a good idea to go ahead a vacate if the IBF is going to want him to fight those type of fighters. At least give him a year to make the mandatory defense instead of immediate. Some accomodation should be made so that a Hatton VS. JLC fight can happen.

Originally Posted by amat

Originally Posted by miles

Originally Posted by bilbo

Why is he going to be stripped, he's only just won it?

If this was known before the fight was made, Im sure the fight would not of happened....

Exactly. The IBF just made him fight Urango and now wants him to fight the guy Urango just got the decision over. Hey Rabah just beat Arturo Morua. Hatton better make plans to fight him too

Urango didn't beat Rabah.

Originally Posted by Majesty

Originally Posted by amat

Originally Posted by miles

Originally Posted by bilbo

Why is he going to be stripped, he's only just won it?

If this was known before the fight was made, Im sure the fight would not of happened....

Exactly. The IBF just made him fight Urango and now wants him to fight the guy Urango just got the decision over. Hey Rabah just beat Arturo Morua. Hatton better make plans to fight him too

Urango didn't beat Rabah.

Which is why I worded it the way I did. Haven't seen the fight but from all accounts he got a gift.

Originally Posted by amat

Originally Posted by Majesty

Originally Posted by amat

Originally Posted by miles

Originally Posted by bilbo

Why is he going to be stripped, he's only just won it?

If this was known before the fight was made, Im sure the fight would not of happened....

Exactly. The IBF just made him fight Urango and now wants him to fight the guy Urango just got the decision over. Hey Rabah just beat Arturo Morua. Hatton better make plans to fight him too

Urango didn't beat Rabah.

Which is why I worded it the way I did. Haven't seen the fight but from all accounts he got a gift.

heres punchstats


006-06-30 : Seminole Hard Rock Arena, Hollywood, FL, USA : Juan Urango beat Naoufel Ben Rabah by UD in round 12 of 12
Punchstats Total Punches Rabah Urango
Landed 163 106
Thrown 515 635
Pct. 32% 17%

* Referee: Tommy Kimmons
* Judges scoring: Michael Pernick 116-112, Peter Trematerra 115-113, John Wright 117-111
* Weights: Rabah: 138, Urango: 139.5

* It was a very controversial decision, denounced by ESPN's Teddy Atlas, and booed by Urango's hometown fans.

Announced blows were Ben Rabah 163/515 32%; Urango 106/635 17%.

Actually this news has made me really like the IBF. At least they care about mandatory defenses and will force their champions, no matter how big a name to make them.

Of course as fight fans we'd all prefer Hatton to meet Castillo than either N'Dou or Rabah but props to the IBF, they look set to enforce the right of the winner of these two fighters to get their mandatory shot.

Maybe the WBC could learn from them...................

Dennis Hobson, Hatton's promoter, said: "We have got the Castillo fight on the table but there is also the option for Ricky of coming back to Manchester to fight Ben Rabah or N'Dou, then taking on Castillo after that."

Imagine the stick he'd get if they did that

Originally Posted by bilbo

Actually this news has made me really like the IBF. At least they care about mandatory defenses and will force their champions, no matter how big a name to make them.
Of course as fight fans we'd all prefer Hatton to meet Castillo than either N'Dou or Rabah but props to the IBF, they look set to enforce the right of the winner of these two fighters to get their mandatory shot.

Maybe the WBC could learn from them...................

Good Point, just a shame that "mandatory's" are riddiculous.

On another note... IBF sure do give a lot of love to the aussies (Peden, Mundine, Those two Rabba n shabba...)

Originally Posted by Jimboogie

Originally Posted by bilbo

Actually this news has made me really like the IBF. At least they care about mandatory defenses and will force their champions, no matter how big a name to make them.
Of course as fight fans we'd all prefer Hatton to meet Castillo than either N'Dou or Rabah but props to the IBF, they look set to enforce the right of the winner of these two fighters to get their mandatory shot.

Maybe the WBC could learn from them...................

Good Point, just a shame that "mandatory's" are riddiculous.

On another note... IBF sure do give a lot of love to the aussies (Peden, Mundine, Those two Rabba n shabba...)

The thing is we might not like who the mandatory opponents are but if they got that status by winning fights and earning the mandatory shot then we cannot complain.

I would not mind at all if Hatton's next fight was against N'dou or Rabbah providing it was his mandatory defense.

For me for the sport to be truly honest and professional, the status of a fighter as a mandatory opponent has to be based entirely on that person having earnt the spot by working his way into the top 10 rankings and then winning an eliminator match.

When an opponent can be overlooked because someone with more glamour, is more crowd pleasing, or who will make the organisation more money comes along the sport ceases to have integrity.

Any sport should have to abide by rules and regulations that are consistent and fair to everyone.

If Hatton wants to relinquish the title in order to fight Castillo now then that is fine, it's his choice, but I'm personally glad the IBF will enforce the rights of either N'dou or Rabbah as the mandatory opponent to get their title shot.

Originally Posted by Jimboogie

Originally Posted by bilbo

Actually this news has made me really like the IBF. At least they care about mandatory defenses and will force their champions, no matter how big a name to make them.
Of course as fight fans we'd all prefer Hatton to meet Castillo than either N'Dou or Rabah but props to the IBF, they look set to enforce the right of the winner of these two fighters to get their mandatory shot.

Maybe the WBC could learn from them...................

Good Point, just a shame that some "mandatory's" are riddiculous.

On another note... IBF sure do give a lot of love to the aussies (Peden, Mundine, Those two Rabba n shabba...)

Sorry... Im a Typoholic :P

Originally Posted by bilbo

Originally Posted by Jimboogie

Originally Posted by bilbo

Actually this news has made me really like the IBF. At least they care about mandatory defenses and will force their champions, no matter how big a name to make them.
Of course as fight fans we'd all prefer Hatton to meet Castillo than either N'Dou or Rabah but props to the IBF, they look set to enforce the right of the winner of these two fighters to get their mandatory shot.

Maybe the WBC could learn from them...................

Good Point, just a shame that "mandatory's" are riddiculous.

On another note... IBF sure do give a lot of love to the aussies (Peden, Mundine, Those two Rabba n shabba...)

The thing is we might not like who the mandatory opponents are but if they got that status by winning fights and earning the mandatory shot then we cannot complain.

I would not mind at all if Hatton's next fight was against N'dou or Rabbah providing it was his mandatory defense.

For me for the sport to be truly honest and professional, the status of a fighter as a mandatory opponent has to be based entirely on that person having earnt the spot by working his way into the top 10 rankings and then winning an eliminator match.

When an opponent can be overlooked because someone with more glamour, is more crowd pleasing, or who will make the organisation more money comes along the sport ceases to have integrity.

Any sport should have to abide by rules and regulations that are consistent and fair to everyone.

If Hatton wants to relinquish the title in order to fight Castillo now then that is fine, it's his choice, but I'm personally glad the IBF will enforce the rights of either N'dou or Rabbah as the mandatory opponent to get their title shot.

Thing is, in Rickys case, im sure he wants to retire nice and early so he's put himself in a position to cherry pick fights (to a certain extent).

Im not sure if i agree with this but if he's willing to loose the title for it then what can you do?