Who's greater Miguel Cotto or Juan Manuel Marquez and why?

You stated Jmm is "greater on the ATG" rankings, how's that even possible when neither are even ATG's ???

Jmm is an ATG Mexican fighter but falls short of a true ATG , cotto falls short too.. imho, that's how I feel so makes it completely true to me

 

ATG rankings are subjective. Veritable ATG's of this era are probably only Floyd and Manny, with Hopkins and Jones Jr right before them.

Still, the thread was comparing the all time rankings for Cotto and JMM, and I have Marquez comfortably ahead of him.

It also depends how you define an ATG- for some it's the top 100 fighters of all time, for others it's a top 50 list. Still, Marquez has done enough in his career to be seen as one of the 3 or 4 best fighters of his era, which at worse case makes him an ATG for his respective era.

 

Very well put. Marquez just has an absurd amount of butthurt over the Pacquiao fights. He's a fun fighter to watch fight. But for ****s sake, the man just needs to get over the butthurt. Let it go. It's bizarre the amount of angst and entitlement he feels from the Pacquiao fights.

 

Boxing isn't just Marquez-Pacquiao. It's bigger than that, but Juan never really grasped that concept. He's a very self centered man. Boxing has had big fights before in the past. Significant fights between greats before. And sometimes actually legitimate robberies. Pernell-Chavez, DLH-Trinidad, Kovalev-Ward. All huge fights, yes Juan it's possible for a megafight to exist without you personally being in it. All have far better robbery cases than Pac-Marquez. As all were legitimate robberies. Yet you don't see the same level of butthurt from those men. Hell Ward Kovalev was less than half a year ago. And Kovalev has to watch and listen to a pretentious and arrogant man run his mouth about his illigitamate victory and you don't see half the butthurt from him as you do from Marquez. Despite the fact that this is a decade old trilogy.

 

Wrong! This is not a troll thread. I was talking to this guy at a sports bar when the subject of boxing came up some how we started talking about a possible JMM-Cotto fight and he was a huge Cotto fan and said Cotto was clearly the better fighter and had a better career, I disagreed. I wanted to get people's opinion so I made this thread, your thread had no bearing on this one.

 

This is a bit harsh.

 

Well better fighter, only if we're talking h2h. Better career only if we're talking dollars and cents, even then idk. But over all JMM edges him out as far as greatness.

 

Smoke Crack much?

 

Based on actual resume, Cotto and it's really not even close. In mythical h2h or skills vs skills it's probably a lot closer.

 

Well, Cotto is a Weltwerweight and Marquez is a Featherweight. H2H Cotto probably busts up Marquez bad.

 

And also incorrect. Marquez whole resume is based on one opponent. Whom he officially beat once out of four times. During a fight he was losing and hurt when he landed the KO of his life. It's a great win absolutely, and Marquez is a super skilled fighter with great heart and ring IQ, but a resume in HOF let alone ATG contention needs to be based on wins and competitive fights against more than one guy with one particular style you excel against. Cotto has proven more in his career though there are some asterisks next to his fights as well.

 

JMM.

I'm a massive Cotto fan but he has decisive losses against Margarito, Pacquaio and Floyd (although I thought the Floyd fight was a lot closer than the scorecards).

But as I'm typing this JMM has the Norwood and Chris John losses which where quite clear but he has the better resume with the Pac win, Barrera and he was still beating and competing with the young guns at 147 when he was well past his prime.

Cotto has an underated resume at 140 and 147.....**** it it's too close to call...