When Cotto loses I don't want to hear

Reg I respectfully disagree. While I understand Cotto was at a more vunerable stage in his fight the concept behind buying time and gathering ones self fall in the same category. Sure after the second knee you knew the end was coming but I don't see why you find it necessary to point out the obvious...I think we can all agree as to the meaning behind taking a knee..sorry they are comparable but yes I do recognize difference between the two scenarios. Geezz...

Oh and I don't recall anyone criticizing Mr. Judah for taking a knee...maybe in your world. If he was looked down upon then the my same opinion applies. Let's be honest here when speaking on Cotto you don't lack in the contructive criticism department lol.

 

I don't think it matters, win or lose, Cotto's career will continue on and a win for Clottey might not be the best for him at this time. Especially considering that they're under the same promotional umbrella ... and Cotto is the more marketable fighter.

The excuses will come, but thats mainly from being a fan of a particular fighter ...

The truth is that Cotto will be the same fighter no matter who's training him, he's been fighting for over 16 yrs and he knows what he has to do and if it doesn't work, he knows how to fight.

You really need time with a fighter to add something on to their game and it may take a couple of fights to see results, but when a fighter has his back against the wall, he will only do what he knows best and for a guy like Cotto it would be to fight back.

 

**** all these hating ass *****s cotto is going to sit dis ***** down point blank end of story........:good holla

 

It doesn't matter if he wins or loses ... he's an elite fighter under 30 yrs old ... he'll have another big fight waiting for him ... especially if he loses.

Mosley _ WBA champion
Berto _ WBC champion
Mayweather _ former linear welterweight champion
Margarito _ a shot at redemption for the only loss on his record - do it right this time, in Puerto Rico or in NYC

 

Holy **** balls fitz...why that's the most level headed post I've every seen from your floyd ball swinging fingers. Good post.

 

Really? Cotto took two voluntary knees in that round. I clearly pointed out that I felt that the first one was strategical(meaning that he was trying to buy some time). However, after that he backpeddled across the ring and took another knee without getting hit. He then got up, nodded to his corner and the towel came out. Also, after the fight he said in an interview that it was his decision to stop the fight as he didn't want his family to see him get beat up anymore. I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that he took that second knee because he wanted to end the fight especially when Cotto admitted as much himself after the fight.

Obviously, it's pretty plain to see that Bradley taking a knee and Cotto taking that second knee aren't really comparable at all. I don't see how anything I wrote wasn't contructive criticism.

 

Now that Oscar de la hoya retired is the GBP chauffeur gonna retire too so he can drive miss oscar around fulltime?

 

Reg...christ man how are they not comparable both men took knees after being put in a susceptible position. Yes the results where different but the intentions where intially the same. I overstand your point and Cotto did eventually succumb but if after the first knee he was somehow able to hurt or sustain an efftive attack he would have contiued on which would be a positive indication that the knee is an educated and sound minded move. Is it that difficult for you to accept another persons perspective why dwell on what you find to inaccurrate in my arguement and spend more time extracting how we can further our enlightenment. You can be so damn stubborn...don't be like my wife please.

 

I've already stated that I don't believe this is true. Clearly Bradley wanted to continue as it was the first round and he fought the remaining 11 rounds and won. So it's pretty clear that Bradley's intention was to make sure he had enough time to recover. That wasn't the case with Cotto, he even admitted so himself.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I'm not debating the first knee. I already said the first knee was done strategically to buy himself some time. The second knee is what I'm talking about. That knee was to signal that he didn't want to fight anymore.

I don't know what you're talking about. Someone asked about what the difference was between Cotto and Bradley taking a knee and I gave an explanation. If you disagree that's fine. However, you're not even addressing my main point which is simple; that second knee that Cotto took was not comparable to the knee Bradley took. The reason I say this is because one guy was trying to get his head together while the other guy was trying to signal that he didn't want to fight anymore. It's that simple. If you disagree that's fine.

 

Bradley wasn't hurt and just needed to clear his head ... Cotto was trying to stop the punishment.

Bradley knee = 1 punch flash knockdown in round 1

Cotto knee = accumulation of punishment throughout a fight, late in the fight

 

Reg your point was addressed and accepted..the problem here is you don't seem absorb my point which is as you say "fine" I mentioned the other day that you can be quite self righteous and by the looks of our conversation the observation holds true. Its like your completely ignoring my acceptance of your point on the second knee cotto took yet you refuse to be accept the idea that the first knee is comparable. Why so argumentive brother? I didn't give the washington nationals their first win of the season the phillies did so don't take your anger out on me...

 

Cotto won't lose to Clottey. Clottey will sooon realise that he chose the wrong profession once he gets banged by that first big left to his side. Clottey won't be able to finish the fight.

 

Listen fitz I've already addressed your points my intentions where to refute an earlier poster who seemingly looked down upon taking kness. Taking a knee can happen for a number of reasons and they can mean many things point is its used to recoup at a time of need. I don't mind going up against the two of you numbskulls just give youselves a chance to pick your battles...its sad because I'm not trying to be argumentive with ya'll.

 

Here's the problem Caper, I already posted a while ago that the first knee was strategical. I've reaffirmed that point as well. I've never said that the first knee wasn't comparable. I don't even know why we're even talking about that first knee. And the Phils are the defending champs, not two time defending choke artists like the Mets. Keep that in mind the next time u try to bust on them.:deal

 

:yikes Mets > Phillies