Cotto's mistake he fought 2 slick fighters in a row...

So he should fight some come forward brawler with limited skills and pretend to be an ATG? Larry these guys don't get it. Cotto fought Trout to try and regain a belt AND test himself. I think its a good thing, even though he lost. He's doing the right thing by passing that torch, planned or not. I wish more top fighters let underdogs and unknowns grow in the sport. Trout is on everyone's mind now, we all want to see him against the best. Good on Cotto for letting him shine.

what Roach is probably saying is after losing to a slick fighter like Floyd, Cotto should of taken an opponent he could hit, instead of taking on another slick guy right away... Cotto only wants to fight the best though, and in certain parts of the fight it was almost like he wanted to show that he was slicker than Trout. I suppose he should have fought just one slick fighter in a row......???

It was more than Trout being slick. Trout had a very noticeable reach / size advantage on Cotto and he exploited it on top of being a very good boxer. Cotto has fought well against speed fighters, but all speed fighters aren't slick boxers by definition. Mosley and Judah are what I'd call speed fighters before calling them "slick".

Maybe, maybe not. I remember when watching the Margarito fight thinking that he wouldnt quite be the same afterwards, its a short career for a boxer. Cotto is a very good fighter and is still relatively handy, but I dont think he is anywhere near as fresh or as sharp as he was. Don't get me wrong, I agree the Margarito fight took a lot out of him and he is past prime but at the same time imo he is still fairly good. I'd still pick him to beat Canelo although I understand why others disagree. On another note...great sig pic! yeah, grew up watching those guys

he didn't "make a mistake" he's just not that good, and shouldn't keep on fighting set ups like he has done his whole career in order to fabricate some impression he's an elite fighter. Nobody really cares about your biased opinion!

I dunno, I think he could still beat other highly rated opponents. Trout was a poor matchmaking choice. I personally believe Mayweather beat him with skill, Trout primarily with his size. Maybe, maybe not. I remember when watching the Margarito fight thinking that he wouldnt quite be the same afterwards, its a short career for a boxer. Cotto is a very good fighter and is still relatively handy, but I dont think he is anywhere near as fresh or as sharp as he was. On another note...great sig pic!

Slickness has nothing to do with it, he is just way past his best. The beatings he took against Marg and Manny effectively ended his prime. I think the Marg fight did the most damage, a beating like that takes a lot out of a fighter and he took another savage one shortly after from Manny. thats it. I dunno, I think he could still beat other highly rated opponents. Trout was a poor matchmaking choice. I personally believe Mayweather beat him with skill, Trout primarily with his size.

Slickness has nothing to do with it, he is just way past his best. The beatings he took against Marg and Manny effectively ended his prime. I think the Marg fight did the most damage, a beating like that takes a lot out of a fighter and he took another savage one shortly after from Manny. thats it.

So he should fight some come forward brawler with limited skills and pretend to be an ATG? If Trout was a come-forward fighter he would have Margarito'd Cotto, too big and strong.

what Roach is probably saying is after losing to a slick fighter like Floyd, Cotto should of taken an opponent he could hit, instead of taking on another slick guy right away... Cotto only wants to fight the best though, and in certain parts of the fight it was almost like he wanted to show that he was slicker than Trout. Naw man, Trout was really big he looked like a few weight classes larger than him and took cotto's shots pretty well being that size. It's a lil discouraging when you been trying to set up the hook and when it lands... nada. Trout was way huge and since he had size and reach with decent ability it made cotto's job allot harder. Cotto is a 147 lbs'er he's too small for this 154lbs weight class.

It had nothing to do with style, Cotto lost simply because he was too small for Trout. When you are the "bully" and the boxer outweighs you by 10 pounds would be my guess, you're probably not going to win. His power had no affect on Trout and he wasn't going to be pushing Trout around like Floyd considering Floyd was like 25 pounds lighter than Trout on fight night. Cotto is too small and old for JMW it's that simple, unless he plans on going back down to 147 he should retire I feel. I don't see him beating any top level competition at 154 including Canelo he doesn't have the stamina to box for 12 rounds and his power isn't enough to be a threat at JMW.

I think he should be applauded for taking on an unbeaten young champion rather than go for an easier opponent. So he came up short... its not the end of the world. TBH I think Cotto is too small for 154 any way, he could do better back at 147.

Brilliant idea! Fight lower level guys and don't to worry about losing. Look, Cotto is good and all, he's just not able to contend at the level he used to. No shame in that. What's with people acting like it's a riddle?

Yes and no, He did fight 2 slick fighters, but he is also clearly not the same Cotto, and he needs to retire. He had some moments againts Trout but he didnt have it in him to go that extra mile like he did back when he was younger againts Zab and Mosely. He should retire, thats just my opinion. He fought everyone had alot of wars and that takes a toll on a fighter.

At this stage in his career, fighting is nothing more then just a job. He should have fought whoever gave him the most money and that was Pac. Dumb move by Cotto.

So he should fight some come forward brawler with limited skills and pretend to be an ATG? lol well played, sir. well played.

Difficult to win, but you likely won't get KOed if you lose. Roach thinks it's bad decision because he lost but had it been another credible fighter at that weight he may have ended up TKO'ed. Seems like he wanted to try to add a belt before getting to Canelo but also didn't want to take excessive damage on the way. K9 seems like it would be an easy win but that's a physical fight win or lose that a Trout fight isn't. Don't get me wrong, Trout dominated and busted him up but it's not as bad as it could have been against a champion level guy. If you think he should have just taken on a journeyman that's another point, but he wanted to go for a tough guy. Trout was an OK choice imo despite the loss. At this point in a career, yeah, I put stock into winning/losing, but with someone like Cotto I focus more on how much damage their taking as they wind they're way down, especially going a fight where we most think will end in a KO with Canelo. He'll need every last bit of grit he has left if they still end up making that

Mr Larryx not sure if it pro cotto or against him, he's a great fighter I commend him for not taking the softer touch but it was the wrong move. He's had dome wars and a couple breakdowns no one would blame him for taking a softer touch on a non PvP card. ruminants you are probably hinting that he shouldn't get credit for Floyd fight, I think he should get full credit its universally agreed he put up the most respectable effort since Oscar. shoulder roll good point about k9 having a belt going into PvP fight against canelo is obviously important for negotiations and purse and selling point, so k9 would have been perfect option

I thought Cotto was supposed to be good against slick fighters? :dunno: Yea i thought Brawlers were his problem

Cotto should have fought K9 instead if he wanted to pick up an easy belt before taking on Canelo.