(my opinion) Hey guys! I have the wish to address a particular topic. Often people pretend as if a particular rematch in some way changed the outcome of the first fight or made it meaningless. This is quite disrespectful in many cases. See Lewis - Rahman for instance. Hasim Rahman beat Lennox Lewis fair and square, there was as far as I know no controversy involved at all. In my opinion Lennox Lewis was the better boxer and the more successful champion. But Hasim Rahman knocked him out with ease. Did Lewis appear ill-prepared? I think so. Did Lewis prove to be the better man in the rematch? You can definitely say so. Does this mean their first match wasn't of significance? Hell no! Was Rahman ill-prepared in the rematch? Who knows. All I want to say is that sometimes people manage to do the impossible and really rise up to the occasion. See Douglas against Tyson. Had they rematched and Tyson knocked him out with ease ... this does not take away anything from Douglas' achievement, knocking out the baddest man on the planet on that particular night in Tokyo.
Cotto did his best on the night, but I guess this night belonged to Antonio Margarito, who's to say it might not be different should they meet again? Sure, there are things Cotto could have done to perhaps take the decision, but he didnt, so props to Margo for preventing Cotto to initiate those changes. You always get people making excuses after a fight, **** me I lost 1000 vcash on this fight! Cotto was great for 6 rounds, then the momentum changed into Margos favour, the rest as you might say, is history
I agree. Is this in relation to the Paul Williams - Quintana talk floating round by any chance? IMO people act like just because Williams caught Quintana early and finished him in 1 that the first fight doesn't matter and its as though he never lost to a non elite fighter.
My intention was not to focus on one fight in particular. I was just using examples to stress my point. :good
