Cotto or Froch - who is better boxer?
Let's look at their losses and best wins...
Cotto's losses:
- Pacquiao
- Mayweather
- Trout
- Margarito
Froch's losses:
- Ward
- Kessler
- Dirrell (yes, I count this as a loss)
Comparing their losses, we see that Cotto has 4 and Froch has 3, but losing to Mayweather, Ward and Pacquiao is no shame and neither of them should get criticized for losing those fights. Let's look at their losses to Dirrell, Trout, Margarito and Kessler... Froch avenged his loss to Kessler and Cotto avenged his loss to Margarito. Margarito is a far worse boxer than Kessler, though, and Margarito was hopelessly shot when Cotto beat him, so this definitely gives Froch an edge regarding the losses. Now, for Dirrell and Trout... Both are good boxers, but Dirrell more so than Trout and Trout completely outboxed Cotto, which wasn't the case with Dirrell and Froch, which was generally an ugly match that Dirrell got the better of. Looking at losses, Froch seems better than Cotto.
Looking at wins, Froch had victories against undefeated Bute and undefeated Pascal, both quality boxers even if not great. He also had a very good win against Kessler in a rematch and beating Abraham is no joke. Cotto's best wins are probably the old-and-injured Martinez and Carlos Quintana and Paulie Malignaggi, but there is honestly nothing holding up to the wins of Froch in sheer quality.
Shouldn't it be clear to everyone that Froch is a better boxer than Cotto, even if both are very good?
Cotto is a more skilled fighter, but in a fantasy h2h, a guy like froch would break cotto, much like how margarito did
Froch fights nothing like Margarito.
OK this is the biggest farce of an argument ever. Cotto ****s on Froch. You make a feeble attempt to discredit Cotto's career and think we won't catch you overlooking Froch's bull**** resume. Bute? That's a good win? really? What has Bute ever done? Who has he ever beat? Judah's resume with his losses is P4P better than Bute FFS. Cotto's Mosley win is ten times better than Froch's win over a shot Kessler. Groves ISN'T anywhere near as good as Paulie Malignaggi and he have Froch hell twice. Abraham? really? You think Abraham is on the same level as prime Quintana P4P?
What about Cotto beating Bailey? Corley? Fighters who ten years later were still beating young champions and prospects along with Paulie and Zab. If you think the 168 talent pool is even within reaching distance of the 147 one you are out of your mind and likely stupid.
Cotto is a much superior boxer/better skills. Froch has the better resume. Who's greater? Depends how you look at it.
Where did Cotto's skills go against Trout and Margarito and Pacquiao?
how do you come to the conclusion that cotto is better?
Nothing on Cotto's resume indicates he is better. His losses to Trout and Margarito certainly doesn't and he got no great wins compared to the ones of Froch, so it's merely favouritism if anyone considers Cotto to be better than Froch.
If froch lost to dirrel then cotto lost to clottey...
I only watched half of that fight, which is why I neither mentioned Clottey as a win or loss for Cotto.
Pound for pound I would rate Cotto slightly ahead of Froch. IF they were in the same weight class it would've been a good fight. I would see Cotto winning a close points decision.