Miguel Cotto: Better under Pedro Diaz or Freddie Roach?

With Pedro Diaz: Beat Antonio Margarito Lost to Floyd Mayweather Lost to Austin Trout With Freddie Roach: Beat Delvin Rodriguez Beat Sergio Martinez Beat Daniel Geale Lost to Canelo Alvarez I thought Cotto showed some of the smartest boxing of his career under Diaz. Admittedly Margarito was shot but the simple adjustments he made turned that into a relatively easy for him. I thought the gameplan were absolutely superb against Floyd, he just didn't have the gas tank to see it out to the finish line. The Trout fight was a disaster but stylistically that was a difficult fight for him. I was pissed when he dropped Diaz, but under Roach his offensive game seemed to move to a new level. He looked more impressive offensively than he had for a long time, and he scored three stoppages in succession when most thought his power had topped out at 147. Thoughts? Pedro Diaz actively worked to max out on Cotto's boxing brain, with the results being what they were; Freddie Roach actively focused on maxing out on the things that Cotto had already shown that he does well, with the results being what they were.

I like Diaz as a trainer, surprised more fighters don't train under him.

I think Roach encourages a version of Cotto that's more in line with who Cotto thinks he is. Cotto sees himself as a bit of destroyer, and that's who Roach sets him out to be. Diaz was a lot more tactical and probably felt that Cotto couldn't fight that aggressively above 147. Whatever, the reason, he looked lost against Trout and he lost faith in Diaz after that. Would he beat Trout, or someone similar, under Roach? I'm not so sure of that either. I think that's a good assessment. I also don't think either trainer could change Cotto greatly at this stage. But I do like Freddie's perspective in regards to Cotto; he's mentioned his intention is to bring out what Cotto does naturally well and that seems appropriate for a fighter in his mid-30s, instead of trying to change Cotto into a kind of fighter he never was.

I agree. I thought Diaz solved his stamina problems. Roach wouldn't have made a difference in either of those two losses. He probably should've taken a different fight after Floyd in order to get his confidence back. I remember Arum said he would've never put him in with Trout coming off the Floyd loss. But that was when he was with GBP for a short time. He loss his confidence with Diaz and regained it with Roach. Trout was a cherry pick gone wrong by cotto. He just lost his belt to floyd, canelo had the other belt. Golden boy wanted to have him fight canelo immediately and offered him more money for that fight. But Cotto wanted to grab a belt first and trout was seen as unknown and by far weakest belt holder and a easier fight then canelo. Cotto picked that fight not golden boy. Golden boy also offered cotto more then double what he got for sergio after the Rodriguez fight again cotto turned it down to fight for less.

People over rated what roach did for him. Frankly he is the same fighter roach fits his style a little more but the difference is the opponents. He looked like a world beater because he fought a bum, then a cripple, then another bum who was weight drained. With roach cotto still loses to Floyd and likely loses to trout. And if Diaz was in his Corner he still wins those fights with roach and still loses to canelo.

I like Pedro (i like the stuff I've seen him do with Rigo) but I don't think Cotto looked great under him. He was certainly more impressive under Roach. He looked more confident of himself, put in better, more well-rounded performances against Martinez and Canelo than he did Trout. More importantly, Cotto seems to favor Roach. And maybe this is more a question of compatibility. I think Roach encourages a version of Cotto that's more in line with who Cotto thinks he is. Cotto sees himself as a bit of destroyer, and that's who Roach sets him out to be. Diaz was a lot more tactical and probably felt that Cotto couldn't fight that aggressively above 147. Whatever, the reason, he looked lost against Trout and he lost faith in Diaz after that. Would he beat Trout, or someone similar, under Roach? I'm not so sure of that either.

Not knocking on Pedro, but Freddy probably knew how to handle a diva better than Pedro This is probably along the right track. Cotto isn't Roach's star and I'm sure it makes a difference. Could just come down to one guy being a better motivator for Cotto's diva like personality. He fought the lesser op with Roach so it's hard to say. He looked just as helpless vs Canelo as he did vs Floyd and Trout so it's tough to say.

I think he looked better with Roach, I wouldn't let Roach train a Rigondeaux or a Mayweather, but if you give him an offense guy he can do no wrong.

I like Pedro (i like the stuff I've seen him do with Rigo) but I don't think Cotto looked great under him. He was certainly more impressive under Roach. He looked more confident of himself, put in better, more well-rounded performances against Martinez and Canelo than he did Trout. More importantly, Cotto seems to favor Roach. And maybe this is more a question of compatibility.

no difference, just an overrated fighter who likes to blame it on his trainer when he looks like ****, and then gets a new one in the hope that we'll see a 'new and improved' cotto. It never happens... Did you (g strings #1 ballgagger) really just call someone else overrated?

he did give floyd a good fight with pedro

Not knocking on Pedro, but Freddy probably knew how to handle a diva better than Pedro

Better with Roach.

With Pedro Diaz: Beat Antonio Margarito Lost to Floyd Mayweather Lost to Austin Trout With Freddie Roach: Beat Delvin Rodriguez Beat Sergio Martinez Beat Daniel Geale Lost to Canelo Alvarez I thought Cotto showed some of the smartest boxing of his career under Diaz. Admittedly Margarito was shot but the simple adjustments he made turned that into a relatively easy for him. I thought the gameplan were absolutely superb against Floyd, he just didn't have the gas tank to see it out to the finish line. The Trout fight was a disaster but stylistically that was a difficult fight for him. I was pissed when he dropped Diaz, but under Roach his offensive game seemed to move to a new level. He looked more impressive offensively than he had for a long time, and he scored three stoppages in succession when most thought his power had topped out at 147. Thoughts?under pedro diaz he was more better...no shame in losing to mayweather and trout, margarito was damaged goods by that time.... Under roach he was led to believe his own hype that he was ressurected, he beat a bum in delvin rodriguez , martinez was shot and can barely walk cause of his shot knees, and he lost to a superior boxer in canelo and he might lose to kirkland if kirkland comes in disciplined

This is a tough one. Didn't he come down from altitude too late for the Trout fight? I remember reading that somewhere. I think Chavez SR said it. I think Trout is just a bad style for Cotto anyway.

Diaz and not only cause of the Floyd fight. We have seen Diaz makes you train. He has some unique training methods. Real smart guy. It's no surprise that Cotto comes across as a lazy dude hence why he moved to 154-160. So, tbh I wouldn't be surprised if one of the reasons why he left Diaz was because of Diaz's training methods where he actually had to workout.

Roach suits his style better.

Cotto was already out of his prime with roach.