Cotto wins 4 rounds at best imo. Buddy is simply a much better defensive fighter than Cotto. I wouldn't rule out a McGirt stoppage but a decision is much more likely.
Buddy McGirt by clear decision. At 147 he gave Whitaker many problems in both of their fights despite being past prime and having an injured shoulder. He dropped Whitaker twice. While past prime he dominated the likes of Buck Smith, Kevin Pompey, Livinstone Bramble, James Hughes, and Nick Rupa... losing about 2 close rounds in these 5 fights. He clearly beat Simon Brown at Brown's best. He dropped Brown and lost about a round.
I wouldn't say Brown was at his best during their fight. He'd already started to decline technically by then, in my opinion. Either way it was a great performance, so dominant that it's difficult to envision a Brown even at his best winning the fight. He didn't give Whitaker much trouble at all in the rematch, though. In fact, the second half of the fight was very one-sided in Whitaker's favor after a competitive first half. Then again Buddy had started to decline by this time as well, and it clearly showed. The first fight was one of the best technical matchups in modern Welterweight history. I don't think I have to go into detail about this particular matchup. Let's just say I agree with the consensus. McGirt was on another tier to Cotto.
is cotto maybe not his best at the moment, were you impressed with his victory over foreman? I cant say I was, the guys knee blew out and it took cotto a few rounds to finish of a lame duck, dont mean to be dissrespectful but thats how I see it.
I would agree. I think it's a legacy booster for Cotto rather than something that marks him out as being on the road to recovery or improvement. He was winning only narrowly against a sloppy paper titleist when the injury came about. Certainly the idea that this "new and improved" Cotto would give Pacquiao a better fight is just total bollocks.
Brown was a heavy favorite going in. He had recently knocked out his best friend (M. Blocker KO10) and had yet to KO Norris.
He was thought to have been pretty much shot for the Norris fight. Noone gave him much chance in that one. But with Terry's glass jaw, anything is possible. I'm not denying he was still a very formidable fighter, I'm just saying if you compare his work in his early career (circa mid to late 80's) to his work afterwards you'll see an obvious decline in patience and technical skill. Another in the long list of fighters whose power got the best of them.
He was definately considered past prime vs. Norris... it was a true upset. When Brown fought McGirt he had just one loss (LSD12 Marlon Starling), which was 6 years prior. He was 3 1/2 years into his WW World Title Reign. He held the IBF WW belt for 3 years and picked up the WBC belt by beating Maurice Blocker (KO10). He vacated the IBF belt and kept the WBC belt. He was considered to be at his best... even if he wasn't.
I know. I'm speaking strictly from a technical standpoint. Compare his performance in the mid to late 80's (around the same years that Tyson was peaked, really) to his performances afterward. There's a noticable decline in technical skill, shafted for sheer power punching prowess.
Seriously? I thought Foreman won a round and thats being generous. Mcgirt wins this and Fleaman is right, this match up seems to come around all the time :huh
