-
Hatton, Khan, & Brook
The fighters who usually get grouped together are those who share the ring at the same time like Benn, Eubank, Collins, Watson, but these guys had some pretty small windows of opportunity to fight each other and I want to know who do you guys think had the best career out of these three? And also who would win head to head (prime vs prime or during their actual careers because those results may differ)? And even a third question....would any of them have beaten Naseem Hamed or did any of them have a better career than Naz?
Well then, have a go
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
I think Hatton was always overrated due to having a big win over an aging guy who was also somewhat overrated, before British boxing became what it’s been for years now, and being seen as some every man drunk idiot. Khan is a guy who is hard to rate because he’s been extremely gifted but also so flawed, a lot of fights he could’ve won or could’ve been iced out. Brook, especially in the last couple years, is too big and way too good for either of them.
What is the Naz question even about? These guys were all way bigger, of course they’d beat him...
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
What is the Naz question even about? These guys were all way bigger, of course they’d beat him...
https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incomin...est-London.jpg
Not to the buffet ;D
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Naz fought at 126 and Hatton 140-147, Khan from 135-160, Brook from 147-160.....having seen Pacquiao, Erik Morales, etc move WAAAAAAY up in weight I was just saying that IF Naz went up to say 140 if he would have had any success at all or if his individual achievements outshined everyone elses. Naz was 5'4 1/2, Hatton 5'7, Khan 5'8 1/2, Brook 5'9 so yes there would be a serious size advantage but Naz was also a lot more unorthodox of a fighter than all those guys.
Just asking, I mean if you think Naz would get the shit hammered out of him due to his lack of size then by all means just say so.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Peak
Hatton would stop Khan late on as he’d eventually get to him with relentless pressure - I think Hatton was overrated too.
Brook stops Khan early and easily.
Hatton and Broom would go to the cards. Would be SD one way or other.
Hamed too small but at 135 maybe he has a chance to ice Khan
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Naz couldn’t have gone up to 140 and fought Hatton. I don’t care how many stories came out of his gym saying he could mix with Light Heavies.
Naz certainly had the most financially rewarding career , along with Hatton , Brook has the most power, and Khan is a prick.
But if I was able to be one of them , I would absolutely love to have had the Legacy that Hatton had. When he took 20,000 fans to Vegas, that is something very , very special.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Yep agreed re Hatton legacy. Was unbelievable.
Don’t really know an amir Khan fan ??
Hamed made it fun to watch the little guys. Never like watching the lower weight divisions as they just seem to knock fuck out of each other yet it always went to the cards. Hamed changed all that for a spell but couldn’t continue to cement his legacy and get to legend status.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Naz fought at 126 and Hatton 140-147, Khan from 135-160, Brook from 147-160.....having seen Pacquiao, Erik Morales, etc move WAAAAAAY up in weight I was just saying that IF Naz went up to say 140 if he would have had any success at all or if his individual achievements outshined everyone elses. Naz was 5'4 1/2, Hatton 5'7, Khan 5'8 1/2, Brook 5'9 so yes there would be a serious size advantage but Naz was also a lot more unorthodox of a fighter than all those guys.
Just asking, I mean if you think Naz would get the shit hammered out of him due to his lack of size then by all means just say so.
Did I not? I also don’t feel Roman Gonzalez would have had a good chance against jermell Charlo.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
As for who had the better career well if you go strictly by fan support I'd have to say Hatton. I also believe he was overrated, and buoyed mainly by his work rate. Like Canelo against Floyd, Ricky had his moment in the sun blotted out not just by Floyd.... but by Pacquiao. Yes... Khan is extremely gifted, but has showed the penchant for failing in the crucial moments. I also think his ill-advised fight vs Canelo was a potential career buster. Of the three mentioned I sympathize with Brook the most. Much less mouthy than Khan, yet extremely gifted in his own right. Unfortunately he went and did a Khan, getting into the ring with GGG. Must've been an outbreak of "stupid" right about that time.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
As for who had the better career well if you go strictly by fan support I'd have to say Hatton. I also believe he was overrated, and buoyed mainly by his work rate. Like Canelo against Floyd, Ricky had his moment in the sun blotted out not just by Floyd.... but by Pacquiao. Yes... Khan is extremely gifted, but has showed the penchant for failing in the crucial moments. I also think his ill-advised fight vs Canelo was a potential career buster. Of the three mentioned I sympathize with Brook the most. Much less mouthy than Khan, yet extremely gifted in his own right. Unfortunately he went and did a Khan, getting into the ring with GGG. Must've been an outbreak of "stupid" right about that time.
How can you go by fan support though? It means nothing. Agree on the Brook thing, I think it was a ballsier and better showing by him, although that’s debatable I guess, he and Khan both went in and stuck with the only real game plan that gave them a chance to win. Both of those fights were actually quite stupid when you think of it...
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
I get the point about Hatton being overrated, and it’s a fair one. Caught Tsyu at the right time, exposed by Floyd and Pac, etc.
But what I liked was that he went out and tested himself to the full. He fought the best 2 fighters on the planet , and came short, but he wasn’t afraid to find his level.
Some other ATG Brits can’t say the same. As much as I like him , JC Spirngs to mind immediately, Eubank and Benn for whatever reasons didn’t take on the Nunn’s , Toney’s , Jones Jr’s of this World. Although I have massive admiration and respect for what Benn put himself through against McLellan in a tragic fight.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
As for who had the better career well if you go strictly by fan support I'd have to say Hatton. I also believe he was overrated, and buoyed mainly by his work rate. Like Canelo against Floyd, Ricky had his moment in the sun blotted out not just by Floyd.... but by Pacquiao. Yes... Khan is extremely gifted, but has showed the penchant for failing in the crucial moments. I also think his ill-advised fight vs Canelo was a potential career buster. Of the three mentioned I sympathize with Brook the most. Much less mouthy than Khan, yet extremely gifted in his own right. Unfortunately he went and did a Khan, getting into the ring with GGG. Must've been an outbreak of "stupid" right about that time.
How can you go by fan support though? It means nothing. Agree on the Brook thing, I think it was a ballsier and better showing by him, although that’s debatable I guess, he and Khan both went in and stuck with the only real game plan that gave them a chance to win. Both of those fights were actually quite stupid when you think of it...
Ok I was reaching. But one of the questions was who had the better career. It depends on the measuring stick you use. Agreed fan support is a weak one, but it's the only one I could find on Ricky. Admired his work rate, but he came up woefully short in his two real tests. I especially take points away when the person in question has claimed to be fighting for the mythical p4p, which was of course Hatton's case.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
As for who had the better career well if you go strictly by fan support I'd have to say Hatton. I also believe he was overrated, and buoyed mainly by his work rate. Like Canelo against Floyd, Ricky had his moment in the sun blotted out not just by Floyd.... but by Pacquiao. Yes... Khan is extremely gifted, but has showed the penchant for failing in the crucial moments. I also think his ill-advised fight vs Canelo was a potential career buster. Of the three mentioned I sympathize with Brook the most. Much less mouthy than Khan, yet extremely gifted in his own right. Unfortunately he went and did a Khan, getting into the ring with GGG. Must've been an outbreak of "stupid" right about that time.
How can you go by fan support though? It means nothing. Agree on the Brook thing, I think it was a ballsier and better showing by him, although that’s debatable I guess, he and Khan both went in and stuck with the only real game plan that gave them a chance to win. Both of those fights were actually quite stupid when you think of it...
Ok I was reaching. But one of the questions was who had the better career. It depends on the measuring stick you use. Agreed fan support is a weak one, but it's the only one I could find on Ricky. Admired his work rate, but he came up woefully short in his two real tests. I especially take points away when the person in question has claimed to be fighting for the mythical p4p, which was of course Hatton's case.
Yeah think we have the same take. Hatton was a lot more popular/regarded than his ability merited, that was clear as soon as he fought Collazo.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
It all depends on Khan's chin, if he can avoid getting caught, I could see him out boxing the other 2. Otherwise Brook beats the others.
Hatton had a huge following and was right at the pinnacle of the sport against Mayweather, unfortunately he was not elite.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Hatton has had the better career out of these three. He has the Tszyu moment in Manchester and nothing the other 2 have could out do that.
Hatton was never a world class welterweight and Brook would beat him. I do not think Hatton could beat Porter or lived with Spence.
Hatton could beat Khan at light welter and that would be the best fight out of the 3 as that was their best and prime weights.
Naz was too small for these fighters but p4p wipes them out.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Alpha
It all depends on Khan's chin, if he can avoid getting caught, I could see him out boxing the other 2. Otherwise Brook beats the others.
Hatton had a huge following and was right at the pinnacle of the sport against Mayweather, unfortunately he was not elite.
The problem is he can’t avoid getting caught because he has terrible defensive instincts. Watch where his hands are when he gets KOed, no boxer that has ANY coaching should move his hands how he does. He’s like the guy that can throw punches well enough but when something comes back at him he sticks a hand out and turns his head away. That guy is always going to get clipped.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Hatton was like the British version of Shawn Porter, a guy with an amazing work rate who will maul you and smother you until you wilt. Not the most fan-friendly of styles, but effective a lot of the time. The mauling and smothering will cover for many boxing skill gaps, and many times you can get away with it. Against Floyd and Pacquiao, unfortunately for Hatton it didn't work.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
Hatton was like the British version of Shawn Porter, a guy with an amazing work rate who will maul you and smother you until you wilt. Not the most fan-friendly of styles, but effective a lot of the time. The mauling and smothering will cover for many boxing skill gaps, and many times you can get away with it. Against Floyd and Pacquiao, unfortunately for Hatton it didn't work.
At light welter he was a beast, just walked into a great Manny Pac.
-
Re: Hatton, Khan, & Brook
I think Hatton maximized the most of what he had and especially surpassed a Khan. His signature was heart on the sleeve tearing into the other guys midsection and was genuine confidence. It transferred into a traveling loyal fan base and a couple of mega fights with the two best p4p fighters going. Sure they didn't end that well for him but better to talk up a challenge, step into it and go out on your shield than to pout and shriek about chasing a big fight only to take one where it was a forgone conclusion he'd be starched before the opening bell even sounded. Can't see Hamed venturing to the weight and think he'd lose serious speed on already iffy footwork if he did.
