Record Slating

[Fenster]

If you really wanted to you could pick holes in any boxers record

One example ive read recently is a post that suggested Hatton only fought aging over the hill fighters and the post had a list of his victims who the poster seemed to think anyone could have beaten at that point in their carears

But are there any fighters with a solid record? when i say solid i dont neccessarily mean without loss just very hard to pick holes in

before the margarito fight i used to think Cotto had beaten anyone and everyone he had had the chance to fight, all at the top of their game. Im not saying the margarito fight changed my mind but Cotto hasnt really been the same since and doesnt really look top of the world as he once did

Well let's break it down....

Hatton beat Kostya Tszyu, who had participated in just 1 bout, in getting on for 2 and a half years before he fought Hatton. Tyszu was 35 years old.

Hatton beat Castillo who was 33 years old. Was coming off a very poor showing against a very average Herman Ngoudjo. You could easily argue that Castillo's best years were behind him.

Hatton barely beat Luis Collazo. Collazo was the first quick handed, prime fighter Hatton had fought. He struggled badly, and some might even say Collazo was robbed. I had Hatton winning barely, but that was down to his work-rate. Collazo won some rounds big.

Hatton looked fairly poor against Urango, although he was ill. Hatton looked fairly poor against Lazcano, and was rocked a few times. The only time he's looked particularly good at world level against a prime fighter would be the Malignaggi fight, but even then that was a very poor one handed version of Malignaggi, who was in the care of Buddy McGirt (i've still never seen a McGirt fighter win a fight).

So whilst Hatton's resume suggests he only lost to two of the very best, when you actually look at his performances at World Class level, you realise he was merely a good fighter.

Like you say, you can pick holes in any fighter's record, but you should judge it on how easy it is to pick holes in their record. With Hatton it's fairly easy imo.

Merely a good fighter that was a lineal lightwelter champion, P4P top 10 ranked (on two seperate occasions) and honured with the fighter of the year award by both The Ring Magazine and the Boxing Writers Association of America.

Not bad for a "mere good" fighter.

[ono]

If you really wanted to you could pick holes in any boxers record

One example ive read recently is a post that suggested Hatton only fought aging over the hill fighters and the post had a list of his victims who the poster seemed to think anyone could have beaten at that point in their carears

But are there any fighters with a solid record? when i say solid i dont neccessarily mean without loss just very hard to pick holes in

before the margarito fight i used to think Cotto had beaten anyone and everyone he had had the chance to fight, all at the top of their game. Im not saying the margarito fight changed my mind but Cotto hasnt really been the same since and doesnt really look top of the world as he once did

Well let's break it down....

Hatton beat Kostya Tszyu, who had participated in just 1 bout, in getting on for 2 and a half years before he fought Hatton. Tyszu was 35 years old.

Hatton beat Castillo who was 33 years old. Was coming off a very poor showing against a very average Herman Ngoudjo. You could easily argue that Castillo's best years were behind him.

Hatton barely beat Luis Collazo. Collazo was the first quick handed, prime fighter Hatton had fought. He struggled badly, and some might even say Collazo was robbed. I had Hatton winning barely, but that was down to his work-rate. Collazo won some rounds big.

Hatton looked fairly poor against Urango, although he was ill. Hatton looked fairly poor against Lazcano, and was rocked a few times. The only time he's looked particularly good at world level against a prime fighter would be the Malignaggi fight, but even then that was a very poor one handed version of Malignaggi, who was in the care of Buddy McGirt (i've still never seen a McGirt fighter win a fight).

So whilst Hatton's resume suggests he only lost to two of the very best, when you actually look at his performances at World Class level, you realise he was merely a good fighter.

Like you say, you can pick holes in any fighter's record, but you should judge it on how easy it is to pick holes in their record. With Hatton it's fairly easy imo.

Merely a good fighter that was a lineal lightwelter champion, P4P top 10 ranked (on two seperate occasions) and honured with the fighter of the year award by both The Ring Magazine and the Boxing Writers Association of America.

Not bad for a "mere good" fighter.

I think you've mis-understood me. When i say 'merely good', i'm talking about in comparison with some of the greats which were mentioned earlier in the thread.

For example, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Leonard, Whittaker etc are/were great fighters, Hatton is/was a good fighter.

[Fenster]

If you really wanted to you could pick holes in any boxers record

One example ive read recently is a post that suggested Hatton only fought aging over the hill fighters and the post had a list of his victims who the poster seemed to think anyone could have beaten at that point in their carears

But are there any fighters with a solid record? when i say solid i dont neccessarily mean without loss just very hard to pick holes in

before the margarito fight i used to think Cotto had beaten anyone and everyone he had had the chance to fight, all at the top of their game. Im not saying the margarito fight changed my mind but Cotto hasnt really been the same since and doesnt really look top of the world as he once did

Well let's break it down....

Hatton beat Kostya Tszyu, who had participated in just 1 bout, in getting on for 2 and a half years before he fought Hatton. Tyszu was 35 years old.

Hatton beat Castillo who was 33 years old. Was coming off a very poor showing against a very average Herman Ngoudjo. You could easily argue that Castillo's best years were behind him.

Hatton barely beat Luis Collazo. Collazo was the first quick handed, prime fighter Hatton had fought. He struggled badly, and some might even say Collazo was robbed. I had Hatton winning barely, but that was down to his work-rate. Collazo won some rounds big.

Hatton looked fairly poor against Urango, although he was ill. Hatton looked fairly poor against Lazcano, and was rocked a few times. The only time he's looked particularly good at world level against a prime fighter would be the Malignaggi fight, but even then that was a very poor one handed version of Malignaggi, who was in the care of Buddy McGirt (i've still never seen a McGirt fighter win a fight).

So whilst Hatton's resume suggests he only lost to two of the very best, when you actually look at his performances at World Class level, you realise he was merely a good fighter.

Like you say, you can pick holes in any fighter's record, but you should judge it on how easy it is to pick holes in their record. With Hatton it's fairly easy imo.

Merely a good fighter that was a lineal lightwelter champion, P4P top 10 ranked (on two seperate occasions) and honured with the fighter of the year award by both The Ring Magazine and the Boxing Writers Association of America.

Not bad for a "mere good" fighter.

I think you've mis-understood me. When i say 'merely good', i'm talking about in comparison with some of the greats which were mentioned earlier in the thread.

For example, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Leonard, Whittaker etc are/were great fighters, Hatton is/was a good fighter.

Compared to those greats I guess "good" is appropriate, but considering he was P4P ranked and an ELITE 140 pound fighter, he deserves a little more credit than "merely good"

[ono]

If you really wanted to you could pick holes in any boxers record

One example ive read recently is a post that suggested Hatton only fought aging over the hill fighters and the post had a list of his victims who the poster seemed to think anyone could have beaten at that point in their carears

But are there any fighters with a solid record? when i say solid i dont neccessarily mean without loss just very hard to pick holes in

before the margarito fight i used to think Cotto had beaten anyone and everyone he had had the chance to fight, all at the top of their game. Im not saying the margarito fight changed my mind but Cotto hasnt really been the same since and doesnt really look top of the world as he once did

Well let's break it down....

Hatton beat Kostya Tszyu, who had participated in just 1 bout, in getting on for 2 and a half years before he fought Hatton. Tyszu was 35 years old.

Hatton beat Castillo who was 33 years old. Was coming off a very poor showing against a very average Herman Ngoudjo. You could easily argue that Castillo's best years were behind him.

Hatton barely beat Luis Collazo. Collazo was the first quick handed, prime fighter Hatton had fought. He struggled badly, and some might even say Collazo was robbed. I had Hatton winning barely, but that was down to his work-rate. Collazo won some rounds big.

Hatton looked fairly poor against Urango, although he was ill. Hatton looked fairly poor against Lazcano, and was rocked a few times. The only time he's looked particularly good at world level against a prime fighter would be the Malignaggi fight, but even then that was a very poor one handed version of Malignaggi, who was in the care of Buddy McGirt (i've still never seen a McGirt fighter win a fight).

So whilst Hatton's resume suggests he only lost to two of the very best, when you actually look at his performances at World Class level, you realise he was merely a good fighter.

Like you say, you can pick holes in any fighter's record, but you should judge it on how easy it is to pick holes in their record. With Hatton it's fairly easy imo.

Merely a good fighter that was a lineal lightwelter champion, P4P top 10 ranked (on two seperate occasions) and honured with the fighter of the year award by both The Ring Magazine and the Boxing Writers Association of America.

Not bad for a "mere good" fighter.

I think you've mis-understood me. When i say 'merely good', i'm talking about in comparison with some of the greats which were mentioned earlier in the thread.

For example, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Leonard, Whittaker etc are/were great fighters, Hatton is/was a good fighter.

Compared to those greats I guess "good" is appropriate, but considering he was P4P ranked and an ELITE 140 pound fighter, he deserves a little more credit than "merely good"

Yeah i didn't mean merely in a way to describe his achievements as miserly. Hatton being 'merely good' was more of a nudge towards how big of a gap there is between him and the likes of Pacquiao, Mayweather, Leonard etc...

If that makes sense?

[Fenster]

If you really wanted to you could pick holes in any boxers record

One example ive read recently is a post that suggested Hatton only fought aging over the hill fighters and the post had a list of his victims who the poster seemed to think anyone could have beaten at that point in their carears

But are there any fighters with a solid record? when i say solid i dont neccessarily mean without loss just very hard to pick holes in

before the margarito fight i used to think Cotto had beaten anyone and everyone he had had the chance to fight, all at the top of their game. Im not saying the margarito fight changed my mind but Cotto hasnt really been the same since and doesnt really look top of the world as he once did

Well let's break it down....

Hatton beat Kostya Tszyu, who had participated in just 1 bout, in getting on for 2 and a half years before he fought Hatton. Tyszu was 35 years old.

Hatton beat Castillo who was 33 years old. Was coming off a very poor showing against a very average Herman Ngoudjo. You could easily argue that Castillo's best years were behind him.

Hatton barely beat Luis Collazo. Collazo was the first quick handed, prime fighter Hatton had fought. He struggled badly, and some might even say Collazo was robbed. I had Hatton winning barely, but that was down to his work-rate. Collazo won some rounds big.

Hatton looked fairly poor against Urango, although he was ill. Hatton looked fairly poor against Lazcano, and was rocked a few times. The only time he's looked particularly good at world level against a prime fighter would be the Malignaggi fight, but even then that was a very poor one handed version of Malignaggi, who was in the care of Buddy McGirt (i've still never seen a McGirt fighter win a fight).

So whilst Hatton's resume suggests he only lost to two of the very best, when you actually look at his performances at World Class level, you realise he was merely a good fighter.

Like you say, you can pick holes in any fighter's record, but you should judge it on how easy it is to pick holes in their record. With Hatton it's fairly easy imo.

Merely a good fighter that was a lineal lightwelter champion, P4P top 10 ranked (on two seperate occasions) and honured with the fighter of the year award by both The Ring Magazine and the Boxing Writers Association of America.

Not bad for a "mere good" fighter.

I think you've mis-understood me. When i say 'merely good', i'm talking about in comparison with some of the greats which were mentioned earlier in the thread.

For example, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Leonard, Whittaker etc are/were great fighters, Hatton is/was a good fighter.

Compared to those greats I guess "good" is appropriate, but considering he was P4P ranked and an ELITE 140 pound fighter, he deserves a little more credit than "merely good"

Yeah i didn't mean merely in a way to describe his achievements as miserly. Hatton being 'merely good' was more of a nudge towards how big of a gap there is between him and the likes of Pacquiao, Mayweather, Leonard etc...

If that makes sense?

Yeah that makes sense.

They are all-time GREAT fighters. Fact. Even at 140 it's debatable whether or not Hatton could be labeled "great," for sure though he was a world-class, elite lightwelter during his pomp.

[ono]

If you really wanted to you could pick holes in any boxers record

One example ive read recently is a post that suggested Hatton only fought aging over the hill fighters and the post had a list of his victims who the poster seemed to think anyone could have beaten at that point in their carears

But are there any fighters with a solid record? when i say solid i dont neccessarily mean without loss just very hard to pick holes in

before the margarito fight i used to think Cotto had beaten anyone and everyone he had had the chance to fight, all at the top of their game. Im not saying the margarito fight changed my mind but Cotto hasnt really been the same since and doesnt really look top of the world as he once did

Well let's break it down....

Hatton beat Kostya Tszyu, who had participated in just 1 bout, in getting on for 2 and a half years before he fought Hatton. Tyszu was 35 years old.

Hatton beat Castillo who was 33 years old. Was coming off a very poor showing against a very average Herman Ngoudjo. You could easily argue that Castillo's best years were behind him.

Hatton barely beat Luis Collazo. Collazo was the first quick handed, prime fighter Hatton had fought. He struggled badly, and some might even say Collazo was robbed. I had Hatton winning barely, but that was down to his work-rate. Collazo won some rounds big.

Hatton looked fairly poor against Urango, although he was ill. Hatton looked fairly poor against Lazcano, and was rocked a few times. The only time he's looked particularly good at world level against a prime fighter would be the Malignaggi fight, but even then that was a very poor one handed version of Malignaggi, who was in the care of Buddy McGirt (i've still never seen a McGirt fighter win a fight).

So whilst Hatton's resume suggests he only lost to two of the very best, when you actually look at his performances at World Class level, you realise he was merely a good fighter.

Like you say, you can pick holes in any fighter's record, but you should judge it on how easy it is to pick holes in their record. With Hatton it's fairly easy imo.

Merely a good fighter that was a lineal lightwelter champion, P4P top 10 ranked (on two seperate occasions) and honured with the fighter of the year award by both The Ring Magazine and the Boxing Writers Association of America.

Not bad for a "mere good" fighter.

I think you've mis-understood me. When i say 'merely good', i'm talking about in comparison with some of the greats which were mentioned earlier in the thread.

For example, Mayweather, Pacquiao, Leonard, Whittaker etc are/were great fighters, Hatton is/was a good fighter.

Compared to those greats I guess "good" is appropriate, but considering he was P4P ranked and an ELITE 140 pound fighter, he deserves a little more credit than "merely good"

Yeah i didn't mean merely in a way to describe his achievements as miserly. Hatton being 'merely good' was more of a nudge towards how big of a gap there is between him and the likes of Pacquiao, Mayweather, Leonard etc...

If that makes sense?

Yeah that makes sense.

They are all-time GREAT fighters. Fact. Even at 140 it's debatable whether or not Hatton could be labeled "great," for sure though he was a world-class, elite lightwelter during his pomp.

Yeah agreed entirely.