Fighters and corners: the double-edged sword of the blame game.

i think it is also similar as Hatton/Mayweather. When Hatton fought PM, Mayweather was getting all sorts of praise. fast forward to after the pacman fight and Floyd was blaming Ricky etc. What was good chemistry all of a sudden became bad.

 

Well, I guess it's sort of applicable in this case.

I mean, as soon as I heard Cotto was training with Steward I didn't think it was a good fit. Style-wise that is, he not famous for training Cotto's type of fighter now is he. I mean I'm sure he can train any type, but trainers seem to have a certain type that they're better at and I'm not sure this is Stewards.

But I think the main thing with Cotto at the moment isn't his style. He's lost his spark since the Margo fight, and maybe that's where Steward has the right skills. He's taken other fighters who's career was on the slide and given them a new lease of life, helped them focus on their strengths and get their confidence back. Cotto's a seasoned pro, at that stage you probably don't need more skills, just a trainer who can build you up to get the best out of you.

If Cotto isn't successful here I probably wont blame it on Steward, it will just mean that he couldn't reignite Cotto, that Cotto is probably on the way out as a fighter.

EDIT: Reading that back it's not very coherent and I'm probably in the wrong thread, apologies

 

I guess the influence of the corner differs from case to case.
The Nazim/Mosley tie-up looks like a interesting case to me because I don't think any trainer would have anticipated the much more attacking style Floyd showed in this bout and the rapid fading of Shane (wich could be a effect of the training scedule I must admit).
Sometimes a trainer finds a weakness from a fighter he works with and comes up with a solution to cover it up or a method to correct the flaw, mostly it makes the fighter better but there are also chances the boxer loses one of his other trades in the process or makes the boxer fight predictable or timid, and lose his spot at the world level completely because of it.

What you say... a double edge sword.

 

So, a discussion about an after-the-fact phenomenon, who to blame when your hero loses (that's usually what it is, isn't it?). Well I'd say I'm above that sort of behaviour, I'm an objective observer and objective analyses will tell uswhether we should entertain the thought or not. Pointless discussion.

Right?

Turns out I'm not so much above it after all. I always had a nagging feeling that Roach - Rigondeaux could be one of those cases. I wouldn't say that Roach wouldn't understand Rigo's style, it's more that I thought (or rather, feared) he was trying to change Rigo's style to better fit professional boxing and this in a way that wouldn't fit well with this particular fighter. So in the hypothetical case of a loss I'd be tempted to put some blame on the trainer for developing the fighter in the wrong way. Of course, Rigondeaux is my favourite fighter, so I'd fit right in with my own stereotype.

Phew..
Anyhow, they parted ways.