Quote Originally Posted by azumir
Quote Originally Posted by shza
Quote Originally Posted by azumir
Quote Originally Posted by BIG H
I think as Collazo definately deserves a rematch - the fights was so close it must warrant one

Ricky would get a lot of credit for putting right what he got wrong 1st time out too
Did wrong?

Hatton won a close decision (and he deserved the close decision) - close decisions is part of boxing and why should boxers rematch if they win close decisions? I guess that we all want competitive fights and that means that we also get some close decisions.

Lacy also had a close decision against Omar - should Omar also get a rematch?
Omar was not a beltholder. Collazo was. Ricky was the challenger. The fight was close, if not controversial. That almost always gets you a rematch.
It is extremely hard for a foreigner to fight against an American champ in the states and get the decision. So if a foreign boxer gets the decision there, you can be pretty sure that he also won the fight.

I remember once when Johnny Bredahl was fighting Paulie Ayala for the WBA Bantamweight Title in Las Vegas, most thought that Bredahal won the fight but the scores was stupid: Judge: Chuck Giampa 115-112 | Judge: Guillermo Pérez Pineda 114-114 | Judge: Al Siciliano 116-111
I get your point, but I think the circumstances are a little different here, and there are more factors at play than American champ v. foreigner. Hatton was far more well-known than Collazo coming in, had a big, shiny new contract with HBO, and is "better for boxing" than Collazo (i.e., has and will continue to generate way more interest). So it's not like Sturm vs. ODH, for instance, where ODH got the nod because he's ODH. If anything here, I think Ricky got extra points for being Ricky--celebrity/popularity is a bigger factor than nationality IMO.