Who's greater, Miguel Cotto or Vitali Klitschko?

Well it was close, but by a slim majority 49 votes/56.32% to 38 votes/43.68%, the forum thinks Cotto is a greater fighter than Vitali Klitschko. Thanks for input guys :fing02:

Kind of difficult to compare a Heavyweight and a Welterweight... Why do people keep saying this? It really isn't that hard.

Cotto has the better resume, but Vitali's dominance and his succesful comeback after 4 years make him the greater fighter. Plus he's never been beaten up so badly as Cotto by Margarito - (Who was an average fighter, at best), sure Vitali lost 2 fights but he was ahead on points in both of them and was never dominated and humilated like Cotto. The fact also stand if you think Margarito cheated, which the majority seems to think he did against Cotto.

Kind of difficult to compare a Heavyweight and a Welterweight...

but it is..... no other fighter have ever had fans complain and moan as hard as Klitschko fans in regards to one fight. If Lewis had given Vitali the rematch and fuked him up... the Klitschko fans will simply complain that Lewis 'retired' to avoid Wlad... it will never end. Lennox Lewis can never win in the eyes of Klitschko fans because he is of the 'wrong' cloth and because he is a 6'5 245 Pound British Super Heavyweight of Jamician descent. That equates to pure hatred from the Klitschko fan base. If Lewis was Russian.. or Ukrainian or whatever fuk country the Eastern Block have.. he will be more loved. Nonsense. Klitschko fans are not as narrow minded as you think.

I love it how years later.. Vitali's shining moment is still getting his face torn off by a obese, retarded corpse version of Lennox Lewis. lol. Get the fuck out of here troll alt.

Cotto has the better resume, but Vitali's dominance and his succesful comeback after 4 years make him the greater fighter. Plus he's never been beaten up so badly as Cotto by Margarito - (Who was an average fighter, at best), sure Vitali lost 2 fights but he was ahead on points in both of them and was never dominated and humilated like Cotto. ^^ this. You have to look at not only wins, but also loses, and how it all went down, if you wanna compare them like that.

Cotto has the better resume, but Vitali's dominance and his succesful comeback after 4 years make him the greater fighter. Plus he's never been beaten up so badly as Cotto by Margarito - (Who was an average fighter, at best), sure Vitali lost 2 fights but he was ahead on points in both of them and was never dominated and humilated like Cotto.

Cotto is such a bad boxer its unreal, I guess its his "look" that makes you guys like him. Watching him vs Floyd was such a terrible fight yet all you people thought it was such a great effort.. haha morons. Has Silva woke up? :lol1: at least gave a flying fuck about him, even though it was only for a night.

Cotto is such a bad boxer its unreal, I guess its his "look" that makes you guys like him. Watching him vs Floyd was such a terrible fight yet all you people thought it was such a great effort.. haha morons.

Clearly Vitali Clearly Care to explain mate?

Let's look at two of Cotto's loses, against Margarito and Pacquiao. Both tough and durable fighters, comparable to Vitali in many ways. Vitali is the type of fighter that would beat Cotto too, should they be the same weight. Again, that isn't what the poll is asking. You can't blame Vitali for fighting in a weak era, but it's not like we can up his résumé with what ifs because we think he'd beat people. We can only judge on what we've seen and what opponents we've seen it against.

The question is whether Cotto is the type of fighter that would beat Vitali, theoretically speaking. He has the skills yes, and the heart, but his chin is too suspect. Vitali goes toe to toe with his opponents, has heart and an iron chin. Cotto loses because of a weaker chin. This is NOT what I'm asking. You can compare guys from two different weight classes on resume and skills, some people seem to be having an issue with it.

Vitali is an ATG, but Cotto is surely not a bum. About your thread, Cotto will obviously win on the resume, so the thread is redundant for starters. But I'm interested in hearing why Cotto should be a greater fighter? If his résumé and skills are better, he's the greater fighter. Unless there's some other definition for it I don't know of. Cotto has better wins and acting like Vitali is more skilled than him is garbage. They are very close in that area with strong cases being made for both, more often for Cotto according to the poll.

I'm not talking about welter vs heavy. I'm saying Cotto isn't the type of fighter who could beat a type of fighter like Vitali. So Vitali is a greater fighter. He beat Margarito to a pulp. Was easily out boxing Margs in the first fight till getting worn down and stopped by probably loaded gloves. And Margs was actually better at bringing pressure than Vits...he attacked the head and body. This whole line of thinking is moot though. Greatness is based on who you beat more than anything else.

Let's look at two of Cotto's loses, against Margarito and Pacquiao. Both tough and durable fighters, comparable to Vitali in many ways. Vitali is the type of fighter that would beat Cotto too, should they be the same weight.

That was not the question of the thread starter. If that's your question its idiotic. trying to figure out how a welter does against a heavy and vice versa, even theoretically, reeks of you trying to excuse Cotto being the greater fighter. I'm not talking about welter vs heavy. I'm saying Cotto isn't the type of fighter who could beat a type of fighter like Vitali. So Vitali is a greater fighter.

I've seen people call Vitali an ATG, then call Cotto a bum. I know everyone thinks I have a biased opinion, but I think Cotto is a greater fighter and has a better resume. What say all of you? The question is whether Cotto is the type of fighter that would beat Vitali, theoretically speaking. He has the skills yes, and the heart, but his chin is too suspect. Vitali goes toe to toe with his opponents, has heart and an iron chin. Cotto loses because of a weaker chin. That was not the question of the thread starter. If that's your question its idiotic. trying to figure out how a welter does against a heavy and vice versa, even theoretically, reeks of you trying to excuse Cotto being the greater fighter.

Cotto has 4 losses while Vatali lacks of true opposition. I say both are good fighters and deserve to be in HOF.

Not according to either your poll or my own he's not. And if you want to know why Cotto is greater its very simple....resume and skillset. He trumps Vittles in both these departments. The question is whether Cotto is the type of fighter that would beat Vitali, theoretically speaking. He has the skills yes, and the heart, but his chin is too suspect. Vitali goes toe to toe with his opponents, has heart and an iron chin. Cotto loses because of a weaker chin.