Hatton and wasted talent

[bestjabwins]

Hard to believe, but I had never seen Ricky Hatton fight until he took on Mayweather. Before that fight I had a look on you tube and I thought his chin was wide open to left hooks and this would be his undoing at the top level.

There were other flaws that I didn't pick up on, but the crux of hatton's problem was that he had serious flaws and bad habits that were ingrained too early in his career. Flaws are extremely difficult for any fighter to get rid off. They're ingrained in motor memory. He was right to fire billy graham, as his trainer should have addressed this, but he should have had a better trainer way earlier than this. By the time he fought Mayweather it was too late.

I really respect Ricky Hatton for his attitude, tenacity, and courage. He took on the best and very few top fighters are willing to do this. He had some great attributes as a boxer - speed of hand and foot, great workrate BUT he was overly aggressive, impatient, leapt in too much, and was either unable or unwilling to exercise smarter tactics and pressure.

So yes, it was a talent wasted - by bad training, bad trainers, and a bad diet. He achieved a lot in spite of this, and he can hardly be considered a waster though.

[ykdadamaja]

He stopped Technical improvement at 20.

Hatton just chose the wrong comeback fight. He should have taken a 10 rounder against a Mexican or a Columbian, or something like that- maybe even another Eastern European, without such a background behind him.

Hatton very well may have fought a future champion, peaking. Wrong fight for him. He was doing well, but faded. Wrong comeback fight!

I agree fully with you, but that has nothing to do with the other fact stated.

Scraps right in that Ricky is one dimensional regarding technique he has always been a kill or be killed fighter more than a boxer who can adjust to an opponent.

At 18 He had very good Lateral movement, with Depth and Distance.

I remember, he looked like a crab going after his prey.

He came back wrong. I thought he had great movement for the first 4 rounds or so. He was also slipping punches better than I have ever seen him- he just faded at about the 9th, then it was all she wrote!

[Greig]

Thanks a lot for the feedback guys.

Thanks Andre, hope you are well mate, how's life on the Peninsula? I ran the Melbourne Marathon this year - nearly killed me

I think Scrap makes a very good point about how Hatton stopped his technical development at 20. I always hark back to the Kelly Pavlik/Bernard Hopkins fight, where afterward Hopkins told him that all he needs to do is to develop some slickness, 'like a black fighter' I believe were Hopkins words...

So, my question is, is it that easy? To develop skills like Hopkins and Mayweather have? Or is there something in Hatton and Pavlik's genetics that does not allow them to fight in this way?

If Hatton had grown up in Philadelphia, and had Bouie Fisher training him from day dot, would he fight like Bernard Hopkins? We're getting into some serious questions about human nature here, but how much is behaviour learned or genetic?

[beenKOed]

You can basically argue that every fighter in history underachieved. There's always an excuse for losses, bad perfomances and dips in form.

Hatton's out of ring activities is just another bog standard excuse when we're trying to find meaning in something. He could have spent his career living like a monk and still have lost against Floyd and Pac.

Everyone is different. He could booze and live "bad" and yet still have a great career. Some people embarrass themselves after drinking two pints of beer, others act perfectly sober after ten.

I doubt there's ever been a human that didn't wish they had a chance to do things different. It doesn't mean it would have been right though.

Every stinking one of us have underachieved. I would not want to meet the person who has always performed at their top level. That person would be a scary SOB, not a person I'd want to hang out with or one who would want to hang out with me.

[IamInuit]

Hey all, I wrote this about Rick's comeback and retirement.

There's nothing new in it, I suppose we all felt Ricky hadn't made the most of his opportunities three and a half yeas ago when he lost to Pacquiao. I honestly think he should have had a tune-up first off the bat, but there you go. It's sad, and I hope he can learn to live with it.

Let me know what you reckon.

The View from the Outer | Thoughts on sport, music, film, books and life.

Really good read Greig but the thread title bugged me a bit and I mean no offense by that. If anything Hatton has been an overachiever based on lifestyle. He would not be the Ricky Hatton we know if he was say a mormon.

[palmerq]

He stopped Technical improvement at 20.

Hatton just chose the wrong comeback fight. He should have taken a 10 rounder against a Mexican or a Columbian, or something like that- maybe even another Eastern European, without such a background behind him.

Hatton very well may have fought a future champion, peaking. Wrong fight for him. He was doing well, but faded. Wrong comeback fight!

he should have fought katsidis like the early rumours were suggesting :S katsidis is finished too and a bigger name ... but hats off to hattons team I think their plan was to go after mallignaggi so they took this senchencko fellow on to see how hatton would compare...

[beenKOed]

He stopped Technical improvement at 20.

Hatton just chose the wrong comeback fight. He should have taken a 10 rounder against a Mexican or a Columbian, or something like that- maybe even another Eastern European, without such a background behind him.

Hatton very well may have fought a future champion, peaking. Wrong fight for him. He was doing well, but faded. Wrong comeback fight!

he should have fought katsidis like the early rumours were suggesting :S katsidis is finished too and a bigger name ... but hats off to hattons team I think their plan was to go after mallignaggi so they took this senchencko fellow on to see how hatton would compare...

Should've, would've, could've. It is what it is, Hatton did what he wanted and it didn't go his way. He said he got an answer to that question in the back of his mind, and I'm not going to second guess him anymore.
Enjoy retirement from the ring. Good luck, peace and thanks for the memories.

[Gandalf]

Even as I say this Hatton is one of my favourite fighters, but he did throw a lot away. The ego grew and insread of boosting it with new tricks in his time off, he would pig out for a couple of months. Just look at Collazo perched in as Hattons only fight of 2006. What was the man doing in his time before and after? Honing his skills for weeks a time or else thinking "I'm not busy" might as well have fun. It was at this point the warning signs came out. Hatton by blowing up was showing that his only hungriness was in the belly. Very little in the way of staying shape outside the ring, working on new thingsseemingly a sideshow.

Since Tszyu, there is little you can put on Hatton as being new. Castillo told us nothing as it was too short. Lazcano did as Hatton was being forced to win his rounds. Urango did as the final half saw Hatton holding on just to let an early lead give him the win. A hodge poge stew really. Nothing truly impressive.

Once Hatton was fighting twice a year he began to slide. Weight gain became a bigger hurdle and Hatton was not learning new skills. It was almost regression and finally we saw Tyson against Danny Williams. Hatton clearly in the Tyson role.

[Fenster]

The very best version of Hatton would've never beat Mayweather or Pac. Hatton was a genuine proven world-class performer but those guys are special and whooped him to easily to believe he could have done better.

So who could he beat at 140/147 to strengthen his record?

Mosley, Cotto, Margarito? Reckon those three KO him. Judah? He might have beat Judah. Could just as easily see him getting beat though. In fact there was no-one "special" at 140 during Hatton's time. I think he did just about as good as he possibly could.