If you think Cotto won AND Calzaghe beat Hopkins...

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by dzesmin7, Jun 14, 2009.


  1. Scar

    Scar VIP Member Full Member

    76,120
    2,760
    Jul 20, 2004
    Two guys who aren't going to go far mixing it up. Clottey is exactly what I said he was before the fight if you followed any of my posts. A very basic fighter, **** poor stamina, terrible finisher, below decent power, basic skills, solid chin and normal speed. There were so many moments in the fight where Cotto could have been taken out but as I expected previously, Clottey did nothing to bite and ran out of gas everytime he tried to. Cotto is a KO waiting to happen and Clottey will just remain the way he is, a "test" type of fighter for others or a gatekeeper.

    Neither fighter impressed me, if anything Clottey just proved to me that he is what I said he is and Cotto brought in more questions than answers. Of course I'm looking forward to seeing both fight but remember that I told you Cotto's 2nd loss is coming and soon.
     
  2. Scar

    Scar VIP Member Full Member

    76,120
    2,760
    Jul 20, 2004
    The cut is taken into consideration, Clottey also had to fight with an injured knee, that is taken into consideration too. I'm talking about their style of fighting in general, Cotto fought the way he always did making the same frustrating mistakes, cut or not.
     
  3. Little Pea

    Little Pea 'A' grade boxing fan Full Member

    11,750
    1
    Dec 7, 2007
    Well then i would rather be stupid than being an expert like you :smooch
     
  4. fidds

    fidds Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,672
    106
    Mar 15, 2006
    Some one with a bit of sense :good

    Calzaghe won, clearly out working hopkins who was feigning injury and faking.

    I had cotto by a single point, but imo opinion had it not been for the cut affecting his vision he would of won more convincingly.
     
  5. Relentless

    Relentless VIP Member banned

    65,864
    16
    Mar 5, 2006
    do you think it was the margo loss that did this to cotto?
     
  6. CArealm

    CArealm Active Member Full Member

    734
    0
    Oct 2, 2008
    If you think Hopkins beat Calzaghe and that Clottey was robbed your a bias black "fan".
     
  7. NeckBreaknAiken

    NeckBreaknAiken Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,014
    4
    Jul 30, 2008

    Black posters don't hate Cotto. Most black people with some goddamn sense consider P.R.s to be dman near black anyway. Especially the ones who live in the Northeast.

    They just hate Bob Arum with good reason.
     
  8. Scar

    Scar VIP Member Full Member

    76,120
    2,760
    Jul 20, 2004
    Calzaghe/Hopkins was close but a clear UD for Calzaghe for me.

    Cotto/Clottey I don't really have a winner, it could go for Cotto, Clottey or a draw and I won't argue with it.
     
  9. Scar

    Scar VIP Member Full Member

    76,120
    2,760
    Jul 20, 2004
    Not at all, Cotto fought his usual fight making the same damn mistakes he usually does, especially that kneeling down and welcoming uppercuts in full force. If he fights Margarito in a rematch he gets KO'd again for that same mistake, he needs to improve his defense if he plans to go far. His ability to take a punch is decent but can be exploited, Clottey isn't a big puncher at all and had him stunned numerous times, if he followed up we could have seen Cotto out but as I expected previously, Clottey is a HORRIBLE finisher with no stamina to follow up anyway.
     
  10. Kaki

    Kaki Guest

    i had calzaghe by a point and clottey by a point.
     
  11. Ilesey

    Ilesey ~ Full Member

    38,201
    2,600
    Jul 22, 2004
  12. wildharpo

    wildharpo Member Full Member

    392
    17
    Sep 29, 2007
    Amen. If Hopkins would try "fighting to win" rather than "fighting not to lose" every once in a while, he might find himself on the winning end of a decision. You can't just sit in a shell and land five punches a round for an entire fight while an aggressive, busy fighter is coming at you with five or six punches for every one that you throw. Calzaghe forced the fight and Hopkins wasn't finding enough effective counterpunching opportunities from about the third round on - it's as simple as that. When you're a counterpuncher against a clever offensive machine like Calzaghe, you'd better make him pay when you land a counter and Hopkins didn't (outside of the first round).

    As far as last night goes, Clottey made the same mistake. The fight was on the table, and if Clottey had come out in the final round and closed the show like a champ, he could've taken the fight or at least gotten a draw (at least in my book). But guess what? He didn't. He let a blinded, tired Cotto somehow outwork him because he had more heart, which speaks volumes to me about Cotto's drive and determination regardless of his technical flaws.
     
  13. dzesmin7

    dzesmin7 Active Member Full Member

    646
    0
    Feb 16, 2008
    Clottey landed more punches, how come he doesn't win when that's the reason you think Calzaghe won.
     
  14. the_truth

    the_truth Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,042
    0
    Oct 15, 2005
    great comparison, both were great actors and bought the extra time they needed when things werent going their way...:D
     
  15. wildharpo

    wildharpo Member Full Member

    392
    17
    Sep 29, 2007
    He landed more, but if I'm not mistaken I think Cotto threw a lot more punches than Clottey. While a lot of counterpunchers might land at a higher percentage and the shots might be a little cleaner, the busier guy often gets the nod if those counters aren't damaging enough to put him down or seriously daze him. Clottey landed a lot more punches last night, but Cotto threw a lot more punches and was the aggressive force in the fight most of the time. Ring generalship is also one of the judging criteria, not just clean, effective punching.

    Calzaghe landed more and threw more, so he had both things going for him in that fight.