Home | Manny Pacquiao vs Ricky Hatton News | Pacman vs Hitman Videos | Pacquiao vs Hatton Pictures


Friday, December 12, 2008

Pretenders want ‘PacMan’ but Hatton next

There’s a long queue of boxers wanting to fight Filipino superstar Manny “Pac Man” Pacquiao, but his promoter, Bob Arum, seems more interested in mega fights in view of Pacquiao’s plan to retire after two or three more fights.

“It depends on whether we’re going to do a real big mega fight or just a real good fight,” Arum told reporters during a press conference to announce the Antonio Margarito-Shane Mosley fight next year at the Staples Center in Los Angeles.

“If we do a real good fight, we’ll look for guys like Kendall Holt, Timothy Bradley or Lamont Peterson—guys like that,” he said.

“If we’re going to do a mega fight, there are two names that come to mind. One is Ricky Hatton; the other is Floyd Mayweather Jr., so we’re going to see,” Arum added.

For now, however, it appears that Hat ton, who called out the name of Pacquiao after the Filipino icon’s dominant demolition on December 7 of former six-division world titlist Oscar de la Hoya, seems to next in line for Pacman.

Arum said he would sit down with Ray Hatton, manager and father of the popular British brawler nicknamed “Hitman,” next month to discuss the mechanics of Pacquiao vs. Hatton.

“Until New Year, it’s celebration time for all Filipinos. After that, I’ll sit down with Ray Hatton with the No 1 fight on the drawing board Manny against Ricky at 140 pounds,” he was quoted by The Sun, a London tabloid.

Arum noted that Hatton, 30, has already taken part in one of the biggest grossing non-heavyweight fights—when he pulled in around 13 million pounds for fighting Floyd Mayweather Jr. at welterweight.

Todd DuBoef, the president Top Rank Promotions, was also quoted by The Sun as favoring a showdown with “Hitman” Hatton.

DuBoef said: “It’s such a big fight and it would be such a landmark for the sport, a guy from a Third-World island in Asia fighting a hero from the UK.”

source manilatimes.net

No comments: