Which cut was worse, Campbell's or Cotto's?

That wasn't my point. My point was that when someone accuses a fighter you root for, you'll always come up with something to mitigate that accusation, always. You don't do that for a fighter you don't like. It's obvious you don't like Cotto very much. And it shows on your posts. Although not exactly biased, you're always questioning the guy, just cause he doesn't knock out elite welters left and right. It's not a bad thing to admit it.

Don't mean to offend you, but this is laughable. You can't tell how much of the blodd got in the eye, simply because Cotto was wiping it all the time. This thread has pics of Cotto's cut, it only takes one look on them to understand that it was very bad and the blood bothered Cotto very much.

Technically, they both had hemorrhage. Cotto on the outside, Nate on the inside.

The chances for this aren't that big, at least that's what I understood by searching info on vitreous hemorrhage. And Nate didn't have a clue that he had suffered that when he asked for the fight to be stopped. And don't tell me he just guessed.

 

This is a ridiculous reason to degrade Cotto. I'd prefer you question his abilities, questioning the heart of a guy like Cotto doesn't make you look good and/or knowledgable.

It is different. But too many beliefs and ifs for me there.

Lance's post covers this fully: "Funny thing is, Aside from SAYING he was seeing spots, he showed no physical reaction to is. His eye wasn't watery, he wasn't blinking, his eye wasn't burning..he was looking EYE TO EYE when he as insisting they stop the fight. Again, no physical reaction to anything with the eye".

Yes, it is serious. But Nate DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO HIM when he asked for the fight to be stopped (please don't make me repeat this).

 

No you don't. Very few fighters would have kept on fighting after that kind of beating, continuing to fight would have been the exception, not the rule. Fighting on after that would have resulted in a bad knockout and probably serious damage for Cotto. I won't question a fighter who chooses to quit after taking such punishment, in order to be healthy for his next fights. He had nothing left, I really don't find a single reason why he shouldn't have quit right there, other than viewers' amusement (seeing a big knockout).

I'm not suggesting Nate flat out lied. I like the guy, I've explained what I think about the situation in previous posts in this thread. And yes Cotto definitely deserved credit for that.

No they aren't, still it's odd that he didn't blink, as the eye bothered him.

Fair enough.

 

He got hurt in round 7 and on till the end. He got beat up, real bad. I don't know how much more you were expecting him to handle.

You justify Nate for quitting, but not Cotto. You clearly have double standards. And don't tell me "Nate's situation was worse" cause you sure as hell don't know what Cotto felt and how much damage he suffered up to that point, or how much more damage he could have taken had he continued to fight and got brutally KO'd.

Well, Cotto didn't complain about something, so we don't really know the amount of damage he took, do we. All we could do was look at him, right before and after the stoppage. Yeah, the scared little **** should have fought on, what a coward.

 

No, he quit because he obviously had nothing left. Obviously. What outcome would you think we would have, had he continued to fight, other than a brutal knockout? The man got beaten up.

I see. So you think he made the right choice, but you'd prefer he made the wrong one by continuing to fight. Makes sense.

He wasn't, but can you guarantee he wouldn't be if he kept fighting, while clearly not having the strength to do so? Of course you can't.