Who's Win Over Hatton Was Better?

Only two people beat Hatton, one in an absolute blowout and one picked him apart methodically, some will say one was Hatton not at his optimum weight class although the only person there to test him was Collazo, who was a Southpaw which is something Hatton struggled with and was perhaps a reason he actually didn't look as convincing at that weight, but it was a win to take Hattons 0. The other win was against a Hatton that in my opinion's punch resistance had been worn down and had possibility blown himself up one too many times and had perhaps taken something out of his body.

So who's win over Hatton was better, Pacqiuao's or Mayweathers?

Ah did you have to go and start this one again

Pacquiao's, given that it was at Hatton's proper weight where he had always looked far more comfortable than at welter.

However, counter arguments are that he didn't have that fearless undefeated aura about him any more after Floyd.

Both good wins of course, but Pacquiao's given the weight it was held at.

Sorry memory like a goldfish didn't know this had been discussed properly.

To demonstrate how this one splits opinion I am going to have to disagree with Fists and say Floyd. Personally think is easy to say it with hindsight but seems clear Hatton did not have that great a camp in the run up to Manny and for me his head was not right in that one. Not too much in it and can see arguments either way but given Hatton has always said Floyd beat the better version of himself than Manny am about willing to take his word for it.

I'd go for Floyd.

Taking the guys 0 and a few fights/little time before vs more convincing and at 140.

Don’t put that much emphasis on the weight seeing as he outweighed Floyd anyway.

In spite of Hatton saying that Mayweather beat a better version of him than Pacquiao did, I think I have to stay on the side I've always been on, and put Pacquiao's win against him higher.

Don't necessarily put all that much stock in the fact that Pacquiao got him out of there in fewer rounds, as anyone with an ounce of sense can see that such an element has a lot to do with styles as much as anything.

But we know that Hatton was a genuinely world class Light-Welterweight. On the other hand, we're not sure and never will be sure just how good he was at 147 lb. Unimpressive against Collazo and then outmuscled, outboxed and dismantled against Mayweather - certainly not enough to convince me that he was anywhere near a genuine force at the higher weight.

I'd also add that Mayweather took on Hatton at Welterweight having been campaigning there for two or three fights, whereas Pacquiao had never fought at 140 lb before taking on Hatton. While Pacquiao was the betting favourite, I still feel that the cards were less favourably stacked for him than they were for Mayweather.

I suppose the only element which puts doubt in my mind is the fact that Hatton had never lost, regardless of weight class, when Mayweather beat him, and as they say you shouldn't underestimate the difference a loss can make to a fighter's mindset. I'll stick with Pacquiao's win being superior by a small-ish distance, though I reckon most will disagree.

Sure D4 will agree with you Chris, that is always a good place to be.

You've hit the nail on the head there Chris, for me.

I dont think theres a huge amout in it but I lean towards Pacquiao.

Might have been a slightly worse version of Hatton but the fact it was at 140lb and was an absolute demolishing swings it that way.

Mayweather got huge kudos at the time for beating Hatton on the inside, but in hindsight now that we have perhaps seen from fights with Mosely that Floyd isnt as physically weak as we thought, and Hatton was the man coming up, that beating him on the inside wasnt actually as impressive as we initially thought. Nitpicking I know, but I think its a close call.

Pacquiao is rigtly perceived as a less technical and "smart" fighter than Mayweather but it did seem to me that he and Roach basically saw where Hatton was vunerable to the left hook and absolutely nailed him. It took Mayweather til the 10th round to figure that out and catch him with the left.

rowley wrote:Sure D4 will agree with you Chris, that is always a good place to be.

Scathing.

Honesly I’m split. But I think the Mayweather fight would be exactly the same at LWW, to the point that they would come in at a similar size, so that would edge it for me.

manos de piedra wrote:Pacquiao is rigtly perceived as a less technical and "smart" fighter than Mayweather but it did seem to me that he and Roach basically saw where Hatton was vunerable to the left hook and absolutely nailed him. It took Mayweather til the 10th round to figure that out and catch him with the left.

Floyd turned the fight by throwing a lead straight right. It was about the 6th when he took total control.

Scottrf wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:Pacquiao is rigtly perceived as a less technical and "smart" fighter than Mayweather but it did seem to me that he and Roach basically saw where Hatton was vunerable to the left hook and absolutely nailed him. It took Mayweather til the 10th round to figure that out and catch him with the left.

Floyd turned the fight by throwing a lead straight right. It was about the 6th when he took total control.

Yeah but it wasnt until the 10th he got rid of Hatton. Pacquiao did it 2.

rowley wrote:Sure D4 will agree with you Chris, that is always a good place to be.

Has anyone ever told you that you've got a very, very nasty streak, Jeff?

The weight is an irrelevance and surprised so many still bang on about it, Hatton outweighed the pair of them and maintain he would have been in better condition at 147lbs than he would have been draining down to 140lbs. Mayweather beat the better version of Hatton by quite a way, took his unbeaten record when he was somewhere near his best.

Sorry Chris, am still smarting from Naz not making our Hall of Fame, was something of a turning point for me. A few more votes in the right direction and I would be all sweetness and light.

Can open, worms everywhere.....

I share your pain, Jeff, particularly given that he was doing well at one point until the party poopers arrived on set.

Mayweathers win was as expected, It was methodical, for me the KOwas as much if not more to do with Hatton's exhaustion as it was with Floyds checked hook.
Even though Lazcano showed us signs of where Ricky was at (saved by his shoelaces), mallinaggia flattered to decieve. Which left me in staggering awe at Manny's power.

At the time I was way more impressed with Manny's "speed kills" win, in retrospect I think Floyd's boxing clinic is more impressive as a masterclass against a more peak Hatton.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The weight is an irrelevance and surprised so many still bang on about it, Hatton outweighed the pair of them and maintain he would have been in better condition at 147lbs than he would have been draining down to 140lbs. Mayweather beat the better version of Hatton by quite a way, took his unbeaten record when he was somewhere near his best.

Is this not more or less the opposite approach regarding weight that you sided with in the Marquez v Pacquiao fight though? It was reasonably clear that size and weight wise there was never that much between them even with Marquez fought at LW and Pacquaio at WW. Their in ring weights were usually similar. But (and I may have rememberd wrongly here) I thought your argument was based on Pacquaio being the proven WW fighter, Marquez being unproven at WW and Pacquiao being a more natural WW fighter.

Basically if one considers weight an irrelevant in the Hatton v Mayweather/Pacquiao contests then the same should hold true for the Marquez/Pacquiao fight.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The weight is an irrelevance and surprised so many still bang on about it, Hatton outweighed the pair of them

I don't think that just because Hatton was heavier than Mayweather on fight night that the extra weight suddenly becomes an irrelevance, personally. The evidence still points to Hatton performing worse with that additional 7 lb than he did without it, hence why he returned to Light-Welterweight after losing to Mayweather despite most of the touted big money fights available in the following year (Cotto, Mosley, even De la Hoya etc) being at the higher weight.

88Chris05 wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The weight is an irrelevance and surprised so many still bang on about it, Hatton outweighed the pair of them

I don't think that just because Hatton was heavier than Mayweather on fight night that the extra weight suddenly becomes an irrelevance, personally. The evidence still points to Hatton performing worse with that additional 7 lb than he did without it, hence why he returned to Light-Welterweight after losing to Mayweather despite most of the touted big money fights available in the following year (Cotto, Mosley, even De la Hoya etc) being at the higher weight.

That's due to the opponents being bigger at the higher weight and him not having the same advantages, not due to him not being able to handle it. Mayweather isn't an average Welterweight, he's small.

Don't think the weight was the issue, the higher standard of fighters were, even someone like Collazo was a step up from the Maussas and Urangos.

You mean to say there's double standards around Mayweather and Pacquiao Manos? Surely not

Pacquiao's obviously had the Wow factor associated with it. Although he could do no more than dismiss the opposition in front of him ruthlessly, however, he did beat a man who fought with quite extraordinarily reckless stupidity. To see Hatton in the ring that night was to imagine that he had never considered strategy or tactics in his entire career up until then.

In the Mayweather fight, on the other hand, Floyd was forced to change tactics and show his absolute mastery of all facets of boxing in order to subdue a Hatton who gave the best account of himself that he could. For that reason, principally (I regard the question of weight as something of a side issue), I would choose Mayweather's victory as the more "complete" and therefore the more impressive.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Don't think the weight was the issue, the higher standard of fighters were, even someone like Collazo was a step up from the Maussas and Urangos.

Its more that actual principle Im getting at. The quality of fighter was the definate primary reason.

I just remember you were quite vocal about the weight issue favouring Pacquiao against Marquez.

To classify weight as irrelevant therefore in the Hatton fights seems strange to me as I think the two issues issue are fairly similar.

Take a look at Marquez against Mayweather who looked in woeful shape and then look at Hatton against Collazo who looked in good shape.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Take a look at Marquez against Mayweather who looked in woeful shape and then look at Hatton against Collazo who looked in good shape.

That was Marquez own fault though.

With Marquez v Pacquiao the two guys were similar size and dimensions, and weighed similar in the ring on fight night despite competing in seperate weight classes. Marquez cut to make Lightweight, Pacquiao didnt to make WW. If weight was going to be an issue here then I hink its strange to dismiss it as irrelevant in the Hatton fighs.

I think the weight, ultimately, was a side issue, in fact almost irrelevant in both cases. Hatton lost both fights due to lack of quality. However I have a feeling if Pacquiao beat Marquez (clearly) then weight would not dismissed as irrelevant. There was too much dissention before the fight.

At the end of the day it seems Pacquiao gets savaged for any kind weight issue but Mayweather doesnt. That Mayweather didnt bother to stick to the catchweight against Marquez, or fought Hatton at his own weight rather than Hattons gets pretty much dismissed because it wouldnt have mattered anyway.

I would be ok with this if people then accepted that weight was irrelevant for the Cotto and Marquez fights Pacquiao had but it rarely seems to be the case even though it equally wouldnt have mattered.

The relevance was knowing that Marquez had gone about things for the Mayweather fight the wrong way, Hatton did not for the Collazo fight.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:The relevance was knowing that Marquez had gone about things for the Mayweather fight the wrong way, Hatton did not for the Collazo fight.

Hatton wasn't supposed to be fighting in his US debut against Collazo (a southpaw) nor was he due to be fighting up at WW...let alone for a version of the World title. Marquez knew he was fighting Mayweather up a WW for months beforehand. The fact he got his weightmaking wrong should really detract from that fact, nor should it detract from that fact that Mayweather is superior in every way to Collazo.

On the back of his loss to Hatton, Collazo got a tilt at Mosley and was practically shut out in that fight.

Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks....Willis!!!!!!

hard one to compare. hatton was never the same after the money fight. gonna get myself some splinters by sitting on the fence.

Hatton never looked comfortable at Welterweight despite winnng a title,even inside Mayweather was too strong for him.

The Pacman fight I think Ricky was all but finished,awful performance against Lazcano 2 fights previous,but even peak Ricky doesn't give Manny problems.
I think its tough to call,how much of Hatton was left when he fought Manny I don't think much, and Mayweather done him over big time, so too tough to call, timing and circumstances sometimes dictate performance and result.

Pacquiao - no contest. Look the two fights. Hatton was level with Mayweather until he lost his cool after the ref deducted a point off him imo but Pacquiao absolutely destroyed him in two rounds how can anyone think Mayweathers is a better win??

The village searched high and low, but their idiot was missing.

Simply because the knockout cam earlier doesn't mean it was a better win, for instance I would rate Leonards win over Hearns higher than either Barkleys or Haglers. Mayweather isn't the kind of fighter to go looking for an early KO and I personally don't think we should rate him down because of that.

Mayweather picked him apart methodically and even beat him in his own fight slowing him down and getting rid of a lot of Hattons steam, then moved around to the right hand used his space and found the angles used the jab artistically then drew him in and caught him with a beauty of a left hook. Pacqiaou had the correct style for an all out blowout and practiced how to catch out Hattons left hook, but just because he blew him away early doesn't make it more special in my opinion. Mayweather fought him at his own fight and beat him showing the more boxing skill and adaptability.

Also Waingro it's not even really about how impressive then win was, I was morelooking at the main issue of the timing factor and weight etc. Manner of win does matter but comes secondary to everything else. Fraziers win was a more hard fought victory over Ali and was far more difficult but you would rate that ahead of LArry Holmes' win over him and that was Holmes being completely dominant.