It's not a comparison. You said the Cotto win would be better because he would beat Barrera and Marquez. By using the same logic that you did, I disproved that that was a valid way of analyzing the quality of the wins. Lalonde would beat Benitez, but a win over Lalonde would not be better. Same formula. Benitez was better than Lalonde, as Barrera and Marquez are better than Cotto. Simple. :good Also, Cotto is not comparable to Marquez. He is not on the same level. Marquez Cotto Baldomir Three different levels. It is irrelevant whether the gap between Cotto and Baldomir is big or small, the point is the same.
Not at all. The point changes entirely. Miguel Cotto would have a good chance at beating Manny Pacquiao even without the size advantages, in my opinion. He's a great fighter in his own right, LaLonde and Baldomir were not. :-(
The point is the exact same, because Cotto would not have any chance against Pac without the size advantages. If a Margarito-level fighter can batter Cotto into oblivion, Cotto would have next to no chance against a Pacquiao-level fighter. Marquez and Barrera couldn't convincingly beat Pac, how could a Cotto level fighter do it? Cotto has yet to prove he is a great fighter. His last three performances have been far, far from great (destroyed by B level fighter the same size as him - meaningless win over domestic level tuneup - razor thin win over C level fighter the same size as him)
I understand that Cotto will be 'stronger'. I just believe that the disparity everyone is speculating is being exaggerated. The differerene between Cotto and Hatton on strength is not so much. Cotto is a smallish welter and Hatton is a big JM. Mallinaggi fought them both and can be used as a yardstick. More telling will be the skill difference - Cotto is a lot better, and combine that with a slight size advantage and you have a totally difference animal. All that said PAC will come in even stronger than last time and will hit harder and faster than Cotto.
:yep I was going to respond to him as well but then I thought - If I were to reply to every single one of his moronic posts, I'd also have over 12,000 posts of garbage
Everything considered, probably yes. I think Morales, Barrera, Marquez & DLH are all better fighters than Cotto but taking everything on board such as timing of certain fights, sizes of fighters etc. Id say you could be right. Pac is only 2 wins away from cracking my top 10 as long as Mayweather is one of those victims, either way he is still a legend & ATG without doubt.
BTW i don't think it would be his best win. For me beating Mayweather would not be his best win either when looked at in hindsight. Because if Mayweather loses to Pacquiao, then how great a fighter is he really? What's his best win? who are his top 3 best opponents? Mayweather is riding high on his undefeated record, and if someone takes that away from him, his stock will plummet. Especially if its a smaller fighter like Pacquiao who beats him. At the end of the day Maywaether is not that great a scalp. People are saying "oh maywaether is top 30 or top20 and one of the best ever fighters H2H right now... but if that 0 goes, their tune will change from one day to the next.
well I believe that if Mayweather does lose with the record he has today, it will turn out to be a true statement
I think that if he beats Cotto, then alot of people here at ESB should start to give the man some more respect. But.........they won't. they will come up with several reason why Cotto wasn't the man for him to beat the catchweight not the same after AM past his prime yada yada yada. the fact is that Pac is a very good fighter, and anyone that he fights, he stands a very good chance of beating. Pac by TKO 10
You dont think there is any possibility that after all the wars & blows Erik took thru his career PLUS that 1st Pac that thats the point where he became finished ?... the last thing Erik needed at that point in his life was another war & thats what he got. His next 4 fights (not just the 2 vs Pac) would strongly suggest this. Morales was falling short with jabs & right crosses in that 2nd fight without Manny doing anything defensively to make that happen, to say EM was the same fighter as he was in fight 1 is giving Manny too much credit. Pacquiao did however improve for the 2nd fight, I wont deny this but the Pacquiao of the first fight would also have stopped the Morales of fight 2 late on IMO, albeit not as impressively. The Morales of fight 1 vs Pac of fight 2 is a toss-up, a definite distance fight, could go either way, likely a close contraversial pick em fight. I know Morales career inside out, I own every pro fight from Torres-Diaz except for the Lowey & Molina fights (which Im working on), he was a badly declined fighter in the 2nd Pac fight, badly declined. :good