Why not? Cotto dominated to avenge an earlier defeat...how does that not belong?
Because both guys were well past their prime in their rematch. As opposed to the other fights which were immediate rematches or at least with in a year or 2
Because both guys were well past their prime in their rematch. As opposed to the other fights which were immediate rematches or at least with in a year or 2
Why does this matter?
It's still an example of a dominant performance where a fighter avenged an earlier defeat.
The time frame and whether they were shot is irrelevant. The question doesn't say "In their primes" or "Within a year of the first fight".
Because both guys were well past their prime in their rematch. As opposed to the other fights which were immediate rematches or at least with in a year or 2
A simple yes or no answer will suffice here. Was Cotto dominant in the rematch while avenging the loss to Margarito?
It's still an example of a dominant performance where a fighter avenged an earlier defeat.
The time frame and whether they were shot is irrelevant. The question doesn't say "In their primes" or "Within a year of the first fight".
I was just pointing out that Cotto Margarito 2 wasn't under the same circumstances as pretty much all the other fights mentioned in the thread because of the time frame.
I was just pointing out that Cotto Margarito 2 wasn't under the same circumstances as pretty much all the other fights mentioned in the thread because of the time frame.
But it is under the same circumstance as the question being asked so again, that doesn't matter.
Comment