Was it me or did Pavlik

Cotto looked exceptionally fast against Zab Judah and Shane Mosley, two fighters faster than Floyd Mayweather.

 

He looked quicker because he was not in with Taylor.

 

Well, he gave hight praise to his trainer Enzo before his fight for having him so well prepared. Enzo, overcome with emotion, started kissing his cheek....... Let's hope Joe is that well prepared......

 

Now that you said this................i wanna see pavlik vs Anrade :happy

 

Pavlik has always been fast ... he has very deceptive speed ... I think he has one of the best jabs in boxing and is able to double and triple it up ... and his right hand is fast as well.

 

I was there live in person for Cotto vs Judah. It wasn't that Cotto was quicker than Judah, he was more focused than that headcase Judah. If and when Judah pulled the trigger he did well. He just failed to pull the trigger instead opting to attempt to wait to land the perfect shot which never came. He took a beating in the process. What a jagoff he is. Cotto is faster than neither Cotto or Mosley. He's greased lightning compared to Gomez, though.

 

Watch the fight again, he landed over 5 'power shots' in the first round, they didn't affect Pavlik, but he was able to get them in there and more in the 2nd, a few in the third before it was stopped.

He landed more than '1 or 2 jabs'.:rofl

 

There are differences slow. Pavlik still showed his same flaws against a D level opponent, Cotto showed the same flaws.... BUT, continuing sharpness and truly underrated hand and footspeed against his C- level opponent.

You have to analyse them individually and I don't agree with anybody saying that Pavlik looked improved, faster or sharper, he looked the same as he did last year vs. Zertuche before the bigger fights happened.

 

Kelly looked both quicker and sharper yesterday, even if you account for Lockett not being much of a challenge.

As one other poster mentioned, people forget he's only 26 and hasn't hit his prime yet- he can still get better. An interesting thing I saw a couple months ago before the Johnson fight was how many people insisted on how Dawson's upside was so much more than Pavlik's despite Pavlik being only a whopping 3 months older.

It's like people really thought Kelly wouldn't improve and what he was against Taylor is all he'll ever be.

 

Nonsense.Europeans are traditionally dismissed or underrated by you guys in general,(Euros would never get title fights if it was up to American fan consensus)but even we didnt rave about Lockett or give him a chance.Dont try and turn this into an 'over hyped euro bum being exposed' act.:nono
WE gave him no chance either.:deal
Moreover,as an Englander,i think Pavlik is a superb champ,and i doubt im alone on this.

 

The reason why is because Kelly's physical tools are more limiting. He can improve his technique and skill, but he'll never have Dawson type speed and timing, or great movement. He's done a lot for what he has already.

 

I agree with the handspeed, but his D was about the same I thought. I know Manny Steward kept praising it but kelly always keeps a good high technical guard, but he's still a bit slow in the defensive reflexes category so even punches from the limited Lockett got through.

 

Count what you want, but I'm pretty sure Kelly said Lockett got him once. This is why Kelly's D is under rated. In Kelly's world, if it doesn't hurt him, it doesn't count.

 

There's more than one way to skin a cat- Dawson's extra speed would only equal higher potential if everything else were there, and I'm not convinced his chin and ability to execute his gameplan once he's been hit is where Kelly's is right now- and Dawson does get hit. Also, it's damn hard to not like Pavlik's tools at MW with that kind of range, power, and conditioning- it's not as if he's working with fringe tools here, either. As far as orthodox boxing skills, Kelly's are a little underrated (as is his speed, but most white guys' is). Dawson is def slicker and flashier, though.

It's too early to write either guy off obviously, so I'll argue the same as I did before- that their upside is about equal as long as they can continue to have their strengths compensate for the warts in their games.

 

There isn't a fighter in the world right now that doesn't have some form of drawback, just others have more of it, Pavlik has more drawbacks than Dawson.

Pavlik's chin ought to be questioned more than Dawson's, IMO. But even if you don't think so(that's fine), Dawson has the potential to develop a defence needed to compensate for it more than Pavlik does, due to his gifts and style.

I'm not writing him off, I just think he gets too much credit for what he is.