Are there fans that consider Canelo undefeated?

Floyd Mayweather once said before he fought Miguel Cotto that he still considered Cotto undefeated because Pacquiao drained Cotto and that was how he beat him. Cotto's only other loss besides when he was drained was at the brick hands of a cheater, so in Mayweather's mind that didn't count either.

Well using the same logic you would have to consider Canelo undefeated as well since his only loss was when he was drained Similarly to how Pacquiao drained Cotto. And unlike Cotto's loss to Pacquiao which was a brutal stoppage, Canelo's loss to Mayweather wasn't a stoppage, it was a match that went to the cards and ended up being one of the closest matches in Mayweather's career.

So the quagmire here is that how could Mayweather fans deny the notion that Canelo is still for all intents and purposes undefeated since that's the argument that Mayweather himself used about Cotto. If you as a Mayweather fan don't agree with that notion then you'd have to disagree with Mayweather himself in what he said about Cotto. That Cotto was never truly defeated fairly and in legitimate fashion. The argument Mayweather made that a fighter being drained makes any win over him illegitimate.

So shouldn't the conventional wisdom here be that for all intents and purposes Canelo is still undefeated. No one's ever beat him fairly and legitimately. The only fighter who was able to beat him used underhanded tactics like a catchweight and possibly used his promotional company to rig the event for him to win. De La Hoya ending up in rehab, the whole thing turned into a circus to weaken Canelo and make it even possible for Mayweather to eek out a decision on Canelo. Without all the advantages that Mayweather enjoyed and the disadvantages Canelo had to deal with, on a "level playing field" (which it wasn't) we need to realize that it was very unlikely that Mayweather would have beaten Canelo, even a young supposedly "Green" Canelo as they say he was. That's just code for drained without saying drained.

 

hahaha please serious comments only.

 

There's no escaping this one, with the arguments used by Canelo detractors to discredit Canelo saying he created his own weight class and all this jazz and how unfair that was, and for Mayweather fans you can't have it both ways. I don't see how you could agree with what Mayweather said about Cotto still being undefeated then disagreeing with the notion that Canelo is still undefeated.

 

Is that an established fact? And if it is, then why hasn't Mayweather been called out on what is obviously blatant hypocrisy? This speaks directly to Mayweather character as it pertains to how we should view Mayweather's win over Canelo.

How can we credit Mayweather for beating someone in the same way as he criticized another fighter for doing? And remember he did it in less convincing fashion than Pac's win over Cotto. Canelo went the distance and while outclassed at times it was a very back and forth strategic affair as opposed to Pacquiao's total destruction of Cotto.

What I'm getting at here is that you have to apply logic the same way regardless of who the combatants are. At the time people heard Mayweather say that about how he still considers Cotto undefeated and no one realy criticized him for saying that. Sure it was to build up Cotto and make a potential win over him look better but at its core Mayweather appeared to have a valid point about how we should view a fighter beating someone who is drained due to a catchweight. And while many might disagree with what Mayweather said about Cotto still being undefeated, the fact is that fighters are routinely criticized on here for even the hint of a possible draining of a fighter. For example, many people came on here trying to discredit Canelo's win over Kovalev saying the rehydration clause was unfair.