Can you name a Cherry Picker?

[Bomp]

I can accept that maybe something like that motivated Hatton. But if it's career suicide to fight a guy like Cotto, then how is it that he thinks he has a chance against Floyd, who was the top dog in the division? And how is it that he has earned a shot against Floyd when he can't compete against the top guys? It don't make a lot of sense.

But hey, after all it's all about the dough that Ricky can bring to the table, right?

What did Mayweather do to deserve 'top dog' status? Beat Baldomir? Jesus.

Cotto would have been due to his sheer size and strength advantage....same with Margarito - not to mention his concrete gloves.

Hatton didn't want Mayweather because he was top dog at 147. He wanted him because he wanted Mayweather...regardless of the weight.

It's a valid question. Maybe ask the boxing bible Ring Mgazine why they rated Mayweather #1. And if Mayweather is number 1 and Hatton can't compete with the "big guys", then there are others far more deserving of a shot than Hatton, just like they were more deserving than Baldomir. But anyways, you say Hatton can't compete at welterweight, so we'll leave it at that.

As for your last comment, no problem here. I guess Mayweather certainly proved who was the better man between the two of them, even if the weight had nothing to do with the reason for the fight.

You know, I can't even remember if you thought Mayweather cherry picked Hatton at 147, I guess he did if he refused to fight a "real welterweight". I don't suppose it matters a lot. Most of this cherry picking business is a load of BS anyways. We all know it's about the money. I don't think Hatton has any claim to the moral high road here, any more than most other guys.

Bingo. But if we admit this then all the debating of it would become obsolete. Different fighters have very different negotiating positions, so it' rather unfair to compare the choice of opponents. There was a thread about a month ago debating who are the taking on anyone/anywhere guys, where guys like Winky/Williams/Mosley/Glen Johnson were looked upon favourably.
If we compare these guys' situations with the guys 'accused' in this thread (Hatton/Floyd/Pac/Joe) then probably the main difference between the two groups would be negotiating positions. The first group have low negotiating positions due to lack of fan recognition (Winky/Williams) or some defeats (Mosley/Glen) hence they HAVE to be willing to take on all comers to prove themselves, while the second group have the luxury to do otherwise.