I was just thinking why people give andre berto credit for beating collazo while ricky hatton fought a better version collazo for the wba belt and he was the smaller man and won?
-
-
Hatton was closer to beating Collazo than Berto, and both didn't. -
Because Hatton wasn't very impressive against Collazo and arguably lost.Comment
-
I always thought that was one of Hatton's best win to be honest. It was close but that early knockdown helped him edge the fight, to me anyways. I think it has to do with people saying Hatton is not a 147 pound fighter though, because if he can beat Collazo at 147 (although it was a close fight and Collazo was comming on hard at the end) that means he is not a terrible 147 pound fighter. Or people just do not respect Collazo as much as they possibly should.Comment
-
hattons first fight at 147 against a s/paw and still won (he looked poor)
Good win.Comment
-
-
You know how the brit haters love to hate.Comment
-
Same is said about Berto...however I personally scored the fight to Berto.Originally posted by LightsOutLewis View PostComment
-
At the time, most people thought Hatton won a close fight, although he didn't look good in the last couple of rounds.
Max Kellerman lied when he said "most people thought Collazo won" - truth is, most people scored it for Hatton, and he knows that.Comment
-
People... Almost knocking someone down in the late stages of a fight.. does not seal a win, if you lost 7-8 of the 1st 10 rounds.. I know that fight ended not so good for Hatton.. BUT fights are 12 rounds.. and Hatton won more rounds than Collazo.. even if Collazo won his rounds More impressively..
Even winning the latter stages of a fight .. can't erase what happened earlier... (see Williams Margarito)..
Hatton Collazo has always been a fair decision.. except for those who don't like Hatton.. or those whose pride was stung when they picked wrong..Comment
Comment