Was Cotto's success exaggerated against Mayweather?

A little bit over exaggerated by the more casual fan, those who have never seen mayweather in a tough fight, i.e. started watching boxing around 2006-5. But cotto fought a great fight, although he was not as successful as some make it out to be, he gave a great effort and was competitive in most of the rounds. While Mayweather won the majority without a doubt, each round was pretty much contested by Cotto. It wasn't his toughest fight though... having a torn rotator cuff, fighting the #1 guy in a division you just moved up to who is giving you massive pressure is a tougher fight... that's castillo 1.

 

One thing about this fight that I have a problem with is that people were completely paying no attention to Mayweather's CLEAR and clean body work. He was hitting cotto hard/accurate to the body.

 

Outpointed does not exactly say DOMINATE.

 

Well I didn't. Clean-effective punching is the chief criteria but not the only criteria.

Either way, a lot of Cotto's body-shots were more damaging, more purposeful, more effective. Even then, I still only gave Cotto 2 rounds.

The argument exists, but you can argue that no argument exists with Cotto winning 3-4 rounds. That seems dogmatic to me. You would never be satisfied with that high standard of judging in any fight if that were the case.