In the old days, fighters stuck to fighting within their division. Eventually they moved up, when their bodies prevented them from losing the weight any longer, but that was the exception, rather than the rule. Nowadays, it seems as if everybody wants to skip 3 or 4 divisions. The latest superstar to do it is Pac.

When he was preparing to fight DLH, my opinion, which I stated every chance I got, was that DLH should not get too much credit if he were to beat Pac, 'cause he was brazenly going after the smaller man, while avoiding welters his own size, such as Margarito and Cotto. Well, as it turns out, Pac threw a monkey wrench into DLH's plans by beating the stuffing out of him (heh-heh). Pac gets credit, 'cause even though DLH was way past his prime, he was still the much bigger man.

For example: One thing that makes Ivan Calderon such a strong p4p fighter is that he's gone up in weight to beat champions such as Hugo Cazares. Had Cazares beaten Ivan, he would've gotten credit 'cause Ivan was and still is undefeated, but not nearly as much credit as Ivan gets for beating him.

Now it's Pac vs Hatton, and the Hatton fans are making a huge deal over it. Well, IMO... it's Pac-DLH all over again. Except that Hatton is not as much over-the-hill as DLH was. And Hatton's style is to muscle and bully his way over his opponent. Hatton is a natural 140-pounder, whereas for all of Pac's skills, his natural weight is 130. (Not to mention he started his career at 105). So tell me... how much credit should Hatton get for beating Pac? Not much, I think.

__________________
Puerto Rico: #1 in boxing world champions per capita.

Depends, Pac looked great at 147 but never looked like a much smaller guy at all, only in height obviously. He looked ripped too. If Hatton beats him it's a very good win IMO.

Hopkins has beaten a lot of big names but some of them were much smaller and it was clearly visible in the ring. Trinindad and De La Hoya both looked fleshy and were clearly lacking in size and strength. Even Winky Wright looked undersized somewhat. Three VERY good fighters, all out of their depth though in reality because along with size Hopkins is/was a skilled technician with very good power. So not too much credit for these wins for me.

Even Calzaghe and Pavlic moved up to fight him

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Although I thought both looked bigger than him. Let's not forget that until 3 years ago he was still a MW, whilst JC was a SMW, which would logically make JC the bigger fighter naturally, & Pavlik looked bigger in the ring for definite IMO. I don't think either Tito or ODLH looked small at the weight, I thought Oscar looked fine at least against Hopkins up until he got knocked out, whilst Trinidad was tearing guys apart before fighting Hopkins.

Hatton beating Pac would indeed be a very good win for him. It just wouldn't elevate his p4p status like a win over say... Cotto, would. Why? 'Cause of the size element. Pac may have looked ripped, but it doesn't change the fact that he was way over his natural weight. Major props to Pac.

And yes... Hopkins did beat a Trinidad and a De La Hoya who were both over their peak fighting weights at 160, whereas Hopkins had been a MW practically his entire career. But as the previous poster indicated, Trinidad had been on a KO binge, even KO'ing William Joppy in his first 160-pound fight. And Joppy had been MW champion. So Hopkins' stock went up even though he had beaten a naturally smaller man.

What about the RJJ fight? Did his stock go up too? or was it exactly the same? A bigger guy beating a smaller guy?

I think it depends on how good the guy is, I am sure everybody onhere who has foughten somebody smaller than them that is really good would atest to the fact that sometimes size and weight means almost nothing.

When you get two guys at different weights with the same skill rate it makes a big difference.

skill level is subjective. Look at Leonard-Duran I, and Leonard-Duran II. It depends on who can get the other person to fight their fight. Unless two guys fight the exact same style it really depends. If some guy is on the same skill level as the bigger guy, but is faster in relation to how much smaller he is sometimes he can use that speed a huge advantage, if the bigger guy is really good at cutting off the ring or is a pressure fighter than they can really use that to their advantage, but if you watched how Hopkins fought Oscar De La Hoya I don't think he used his size at all in that fight.

Ive said this before. Pacquiao is superior to Hatton in most ways, no dig at Hatton i think hes great too. But Pacman is P4P.

But when you got 2 boxers in their prime, fighting fit and ready to go and 1 is naturally 140 and 1 has built up their smaller frame to make the weight unless theres a huge gulf in class the bigger guys guna win.

Im a huge Hatton fan, i realise that if Hatton wins he doesnt get the opinionated P4P crown. I think Hatton will win this fight quite easily (not 2 easily). But I accept that its mainly the size difference that has helped.

If Pacquiao was a natural lightwelter too hed be the best there is, better than Hatton but he aint.

Though if Pacquiao does win this and not on cuts it seems people wont be suprised and that they expected it. I think Manny would need a hell of alot more credit than that. it would be a sublime achievment.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

There is really nothing notable in size difference between Pacquiao and Hatton. It's pretty much even when they step into the ring. Even though pacquiao is coming up in weight from previous fights he's already a solid jr welterweight. Pacquiao will carry 150lbs walk around weight so I don't really see where you are getting 130lbs natural weight from. That was yester year and not today. So your premise is off. Hatton pulls off a win it will carry a lot of credit and nothing is lost due to size difference.

Unless i have the info on what a fighter is going through to make weight, i really can't comment on the issue of 'Natural Weight'...

__________________

The exact same credit you should get for beating someone bigger than you.

If someone is naturally taller it suggests to me they have to weight drain themselves just that bit more than you do to make the weight.

Calderon, Pacquiao, Griffin, duran - are/were great fighters that just naturally adapated to fighting guys who are taller than them and in durans case stronger!!

__________________
"I bow down when I'm in Killface's town."

Pac really doesnt look undersized.
Technically you could say Hopkins was the smaller man when he beat the snot out of Tarver. Funny everyone points to Trinidad and Wright(both fights he was supposed to lose) when they say Hopkins only fought smaller opponents,but nobody points to Tarver to say he beat the snot out of the technically bigger opponent
Tarver was champion at the time and everything.
I like Hatton more then Pac admittedly,because I like brawlers,but I dont think Pac's size will take anything away from it if Hatton wins,and honestly as slick as Manny is I wouldnt place bets either way.

for me its how much smaller..one weight class isnt that big a deal and could be equal..but two and up then you start to lose credit...IMO

__________________
"Sixty forty I kicks yo' ass, Sixty forty I tears yo' ass up" - Roy Jones

People underappreciate the strength smaller guys have, if your a heavywieght and you fight a guy who hits really hard at 175 you are going to feel it.