Was he potentially someone whose career could have shone a little brighter if handled differently? He faced four very good fighters...beating one and losing by majority decision to another, then getting TKOed by an ATG already notorious for ruining men, and ultimately getting his bones picked by a prime and undefeated non-ATG but pretty good puncher. Was meeting a horrifying version of Tito with a full head of steam in only his third step up in class a cruel and unfair twist of fate? From the Mayweather and Coley (very good fighter, himself later ruined by ODLH) results can be deduced that Lovato was a capable enough boxer. For those that saw him in the 90's, if you were to remove Trinidad from his path (and presume otherwise good, aggressive management and matchmaking) does he fare any better? Do people here generally buy into the "ruiner" mythos? Incidentally, if anyone has video of those four bouts to share they'd have a new best buddy.
I was pleasantly surprised to see someone remember him This was one tough Vato Loco and he was pretty talented with fast hands. I remember when he knocked out a still pretty good Roger Mayweather and the Sd loss to Coley was a hometown decision for Coley,many thought Lovato should have got that fight. I remember he was holding his own against TITO for a while, and he took some monster shots from Tito without going down. At the end of the fight he complained about the some what quick stoppage Saying that Tito never hurt him and that he hit like a Chavala(little girl) I agree that he could have gone further had he been managed a little different. When he was stopped by Santos in his last fight he was clearly past it.
Well from what i remember Lovato should have won that one,hopefully they have that on you tube, (so I can watch it again)cause it seems we watched a different fight.
