I love Miguel Cotto, he's my favourite boxer by quiete a distance. He's proven himself to be a warrior, have a huge heart and has represented boxing very well. However I think, when talking about Cotto's career, people can overate him. His resume, in terms of who he beat on the night, isn't fantastic. Judah, Mosley, Foreman, Torres, Malignaggi, Margarito..... Hardly the resume of a great. Yet then why do people constantly ask why Cotto is great, or compare him to great fighters? He has shown in his losses to Margarito, Pacquiao and Mayweather incredible heart, as far as I'm concerned. He always speaks well of his opponents (besides Margarito, and for a long time he refused to believe Margarito may have used dodgy wraps). He always gives exciting fights and is well iked by the fans. Yet he is not a great fighter, as much as it pains me to admit. Against his toughest opponents when they where at there best, he failed. Failed convincingly. To lose to Mayweather, Pacquiao and even Margarito when he did is not shame. No shame at all. Yet would a great not have provided more of a challenge to these. He won a few rounds against each but was eventually beaten. He is fighting a risky opponent like Austin Trout and I give him all the credit in the world for that- Trouts style will give him trouble. He's had his chances to be great, yet so far he hasen't taken them- he's proven himself to be very good. Few fighters couls have beaten the guys he did and do as well against the three guys he lost too. Fans love him and they should do- he is a great sportsman overall, he represents his country well, he is entertaining fight in and fight out and should be one of the figureheads of the sport. Yet on this forum people overate him on this and should not. He has not yet proven himself to be great. This is my opinion, as a huge Miguel Coto fan, yet I see lots of forum posts overatnig hmi because of his warrior disposition which is something I don't agree with.
He's very very good and more people hate on him more than they do overrate him. No need to keep disparaging a HOF resume.
I haven't heard anybody Overate him by Saying hes an All time Great. We all know is not an All time Great. He's been a Very Solid fighter, who should be in the Hall of Fame, once his career is done.
I don't intend to be negative for no reason to Miguel Cotto. He is the last person in boxing I would wish to do so against. But see- HOF resume? Is it really? Tell me why you think so, I would appreciate it.
Win or lose he always give it his all and that's what count. The only blemish I see is when he told PAC that if PAC wanted some he can get it at 145. PAC fought him there and recently he's been claiming he got drained by PAC.
Searched on Amazon and eBay for a Cliffs Notes version and couldn't find anything. When will it be available?
Not the resume of a great? Why don't you include his win over the undefeated Carlos Quintana in there too...you know the guy who took a 33-0 Paul Williams to school easily over 12 rounds?
True a good win. But at the top level thats all Quintana has done- he beat P-Will, showed evreyone he had the right style to do it and props to him for that. But what else has he done. There are fighters like Carlos who have done well and have a very good win over a solid opponent, and lost the other big fights. Styles make fights. Now if Quintana has 3 plus wins as good as the one over Williams then yes I'd agree it would be a great win. But I don't think so.