donchicho21

See Raymon you are not even reading what is written, selective quoting i guess. I also believe DLH would have beat Vargas regardless of what Tito did. But to deny that there was an effect I think is the dumb move. But like others have mentioned, you are so far up DLH's ass that these arguments go right through your ears. This "nut-hugging" is the major reason that boxing is hardly properly analyzed. And this goes for just about every fighter, but is especially pronounced on the Tito-DLH debates because both sets of fans are so die-hard.

You don't really believe Paulie gave Cotto a challenge and could beat him in a rematch do you? You really believe that, without any bias? The kid got mashed...

Apples and Oranges. Raymon do you believe anything you say or are you just trying to get bad reactions out of people?

Tito beating Vargas made him a different fighter and the main thing that it did to him was make Vargas question himself. I think Vargas' big strength was that he had a great will and really believed that he was the best and could take a punch. When Tito hit him and hit him again I think Vargas' will was broken down. Not taken away but broken down. So yes he went on to beat a few other guys (nowhere near the class of Tito or DLH) but when it came to the DLH fight it was something else. He may have been confident before the fight but once he really felt the power of DLH I think he started to remember Tito and how he just beat him. So i think in that way Tito did help DLH win that one. However, that does not take away from the fact that DLH is a good fighter, only a good fighter would be able to test the will of Vargas again, as seen by the two "bums" who he walked over post-Tito and pre-DLH. That was a bit long winded but I hope you see what I am saying..

So many things that irk me in this argument... 1- A close fight is generally regarded as a controversial fight. That does not mean that the Winner is not a justified winner it just means that there was some contoversy surrounding it. This doesn't take away from the final result, or at least it shouldn't, when discussing a legacy. It is a fact that both DLH and Tito had contoversial wins, that is boxing. None of that should deter from the overall legacies. 2- Tito vs DLH fans will only agree to disagree. There is no point in even discussing this issue at this point. Supreme nuthuggers (Raymon stands out in this one) will not be convinced either way so why try? 3- In the boxing ring it should be agreed that their legacies are very similar, an argument can be made for either one. It is the marketability of DLH, the "golden boy" that puts him over the top, fair or not. The same issue is seen in conversations about other greats such as Leonard vs Hagler vs Duran. Sugar Ray usually is the person most casual boxing fans would pick. This is the same with DLH. Although all boxers named here are greats and arguments can be made for all of them in regards to "GOAT" arguments and such. 4- Vargas was not the same fighter after the Tito fight and Tito demolished him, he did not cheat, that is pure garbage. There is so much more that i can state but that is it for now....

As much as would have liked a rematch I just think the boat has sailed on this one. There is no benefit to Trinidad especially as I see it. He loses and then everyone will jump on him and further question his first win. If he wins, he beat an old De La Hoya, etc, etc...There is just too much drama on this one, which would make it great for the promoters but who else?

So you are saying that this Gotti boy is going to beat Cotto? Doesn't seem to have enough power in my opinion and Cotto's laid back, wait and attack style seems perfect for a Malignaggi KO. We shall see though.

I really do think that the Hatton bias is what put him over. I don't think the decision was a robbery since a good case could be made for a Hatton victory. But, it seemed to me that the judges and HBO commentators, amongst others, scored the fight like Hatton was the champ. Collazo's statements at the end echoed what I was thinking. Hatton did not do enough to beat the champ. He for sure is talented and has a lot of things going for him but I hate his clutching style and don't think he has a future as a true welterweight. He is going to get knocked on his ass by the classier fighters and is going to give us some good fights if he stays at his lighter weight. In the end I think even the "Hatton nut-huggers" are a little bit concerned with Ricky's future as a top-tier boxer. Cotto, Margarito, PBF, DLH and a number of others will all serve him in my opinion.

Soda became one of the richest members quickfast. What do the points do and how do you get them?

Where does all this hate for Cotto come from? Be objective, really think about it. This fight is perfect for Cotto. Cotto is a great power boxer who can cut off the ring really well. Paulie has no power to concern Cotto so he can therefore cut off the ring and work the body all night with little worries of having his chin tested. Plus Paulie is running his mouth, this one is going to be good and show some haters what Cotto can bring. Is Cotto hated on because he is Boricua? makes no sense man, I would expect more hate for the Gotti looking scrub than for Cotto.

If you don't know what you should do then maybe you aren't ready. Not meant to be a knock on you but boxing takes time. You should do you and if this dude embarasses you then learn from that. If you whoop him then move on and take the lessons with you. Work the jab and force him to be the agressor is what I would say.