Hatton's win over Kosta > Cotto's resume.

I'm on the fence with how it would have played out. I can see arguments for both imposing themselves. They would at the very least make each other both very uncomfortable. I do think Cotto would get the better if he could consistently throw combinations to create exchanges when Hatton moved in. At one time I felt Cotto wins it but I'm much more on the fence now as time and thought has gone by.

 

I can agree with all that.

But Hatton also never beat anyone as good as Cotto, raw or not, aside from Kostya. So it is a worthy debate and in a semi-objective opinion I see no possible ludicrous opinions/predictions.

 

100% agree

 

Hattons win over tyszu is equal to schenkos win over Hatton imo

 

Obviously.

This is completely untrue. HBO (Harold Lederman) had it scored 115-113 for Cotto. Setanta (Joe Tessitore & Wally Matthews) had Cotto winning as well. Most of the online polls I seen for the fight look similar to this one....

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=27890

So I don't know where you're getting your facts from.

 

Mosley-Cotto was a completely even fight. Mosley was 36 years old by that time and had been in so many wars. This fight took something out of Mosley, too.
Think about that..
In Mosley's prime, he was having even fights with prime Oscar De La Hoya (ATG level). Mosley from 2007 was past prime, and was fighting at the level of a borderline hall of famer (prime Cotto).
Mosley then demolished Margarito in 2008 (a guy who's style is easier for Mosley to handle). One and a half years later, Mosley in 2010 fought Floyd Mayweather. Mosley in 2010 would have lost badly to the Miguel Cotto of 2007.

Floyd Mayweather fought a legitimately past prime Shane Mosley who was no longer near to being the killer he once was.

Floyd Mayweather fought a legitimately past prime Oscar De La Hoya who as no longer near to being the killer he once was.

Floyd Mayweather fought a legitimately past prime Manny Pacquiao who was no longer near the killer he once was.
See the trend?
-----------------------------
It's a shame that Floyd damaged his own legacy, but hey, he fought for paychecks and that worked out well.

 

"Cotto does not deal well with pressure" is a myth that's played out like a 50's record. It's one of the favorite things for haters to say to make the case some low skill brawler like Ricky could beat Cotto but it's b.s. Right from the start you can throw #1 case for it right out the door which is Margarito I. Then we got what, Shane, Pac, maybe Clottey being the cases their thinking of? In the Shane fight he got tired after putting on his grueling pressure in the first six, then basically took the second half of the fight off believing he could still win a few while backing up to ensure his victory, and he did.

Whether you want to call it a robbery or not, the fact is, Cotto knew he was winning and what he could get away with, that should tell you what it is right there. In the Pac fight, he did not back up until being seriously hurt after fighting a fight that favored Pac. But in the first round when Cotto was boxing he handled the pressure that Pac tried to put on him with ease. Then Clottey, the guy had his face split in two and was fighting with one eye against a guy who's great at putting on pressure, which he fought great for in that situation, better than most top fighters would. Cotto not being able to handle pressure is nothing but a haters dream myth. People compliment Cotto's boxing all the time, guess what, one of the main tasks of good boxing ability is to handle pressure.

 

Very good post. Cotto has the Margarito fight against him in this regard, and that is it. And that fight will always have questions surrounding it, right or wrong.

I remember that Mosley fight very well, had Cotto edging it, but wouldn't have minded a draw or Mosley win. T'was very close. Thing I remember about it though is exactly as you stated. I couldnt remember having seen Cotto fight for such a long stretch moving backwards.

He looked very good against Pacquiao early, until he clipped in that wild exchange. He broke Pacquiao's eardrum and had success at points during the fight, even after being hurt. Not that is some sort of moral victory, he got pasted, but it certainly isn't the bell to bell domination some would have you believe all these years later.
People also tend to forget Cotto was the bully with the mean streak at the lower weights, where he would absolutely wear guys out with his body work. He was also known for low blows, etc.

Bottom line is Hatton would not be bullying Cotto at 140. It would likely be a messy affair, alot of extracurriculars. But I think Cotto's sharper punching, and Ricky's susceptibilty to left hooks, Cotto's bread and butter, would be the difference.

 

You're just repeating what you heard other posters say. Doubt you even saw the fight newbie.
Not even Shane Mosley argued the decision.
Emanuel Steward who called the fight also saw it like the judges did.
Let it go Brita rd, you're getting bodied on your own thread.

 

Yes but you need legendary chin to beat Cotto with presure wait Hatton is grade A china.

 

Hatton has a Glass Jaw at 147 for sure, I think his chin is more sturdy at 140 although we'll never know for sure.

I don't think Hatton could bully Cotto like brickfists did in the first fight, although I suppose Cotto displayed some chin issues at 140 as well.

At 147 it's a mismatch, at 140 Hatton has a chance.

 

Are you forgetting Hatton got laid cold at 140 it looked like he was dead, but in his eyes he was winning the second round by a country mile untill he went cold, lol only in wickys mind

 

What, you mean the fight when ref Dave Parriss allowed Hatton to do whatever illegal tactic he wanted without even so much as a warning? Or the 35 year old inactive Kostya whose previous victory was against shot, nothing special Sharmba Mitchell, whom he had previously stopped? As far as Parriss is concerned, that is one of the worst, most biased reffed fights I've ever seen. Don't believe? Rewatch it yourselves.