Either at welter with same day weight ins or at Junior Welter given day before weigh in, it makes no real difference. How'd you see it?
Anyway, Palomino 10-5, UD. If Hatton doesn't get DQd for holding by the 70s referee I've appointed to officiate.
Well somebody must fuck up a thread where everybody is in agreement, no? Seriously, I see this as a close one and much more so than people are willing to admit. Hatton at same-day 147 is pretty much a prime Hatton and as such he would give a tough fight for almost anybody with his energetic mauling style. He was no match for Pac and Floyd but Palomino was not on their level and it is not like he would simply brutalize Hatton, even though he was a likable fellow from the glory days. Palomino might take a decision, but Hatton would make him work for it. Yeah, and as an addition to you only, if Duran was not DQd, neither would Hatton :stir::egypt:
I already asked you to post some footage of Duran excessively holding and you came up with diddly bo. Stop your malicious clown ring apologetics.
Sorry for not responding, I was trying to get laid which is one of the few things that beats bashing Duran. Anyway, here is a clip of Duran-Palomino http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a93R-Gh7sIU at 0.04 Duran rushes in and grabs Palominos arms. they break up at 0.10 Duran grabs again, holding and hitting at 0.14 they break, Palomino tries to hit to the body, Duran grabs at 0.24 after ten seconds of beautiful art of boxing, Duran drives Palomino to the ropes, pushes his head down and grabs at 0.55, a shocking half a minute after the last grab, Duran grabs at 1.05 Duran finishes a good combo with a nice grab at 1.08 Duran throws a nice punch-grab combo at 1.13 bell ends the round :bow:
I have no real objection to the occasional clinch as long as you FIGHT through it. It only becomes a fight ruiner when guys just use it as a reason to stand still, stop fighting and wait for the ref to break it, meaning 15s breaks from the match every time it happens which is some fights is over and over and over and over. That's what Hatton did. It's very different. And it's really a modern development that refs have started allowing it.
I don't see it quite the same way although I see your point. A fighter gains an advantage also with short clinches, he can take away his opponents chances and control the flow, when the fight is on (=when punches can be thrown). Thus if there is a more strict line to be drawn to clinching, then it should also be applied to the short clinching. If your argument is for aesthetical reasons only, then I can't argue with that. I usually don't find clinching bouts very interesting, whether it is Duran-like or Akinwande-like
I'm pretty consistent with my view on 'cheating'.....if it's subtle enough not to ruin the fight as a spectacle or attract the refs ire I pretty much admire it. It's a fight in there. And it takes real skill and ring awareness to bend the rules at that kind of level. As long as you aren't using cheating to escape the fight & it isn't ruining the fight as a spectacle for the fans paying your fee, have at it.
Really, a concern for good sportmanship for its own intrinsic sake in a sport where the objective is to punch the other guy in the face until he's incapacitated is 'a lie' in the sense Captain Willard used it.
That is glib nonsense. Its a violent sport, and thats that? The rules are there for a reason. Duran, Hopkins, Casamayor, Marciano, Holyfield...please. I'll reserve my admiration for a clean champion like Louis any day.
