I'm having trouble working this out...

[Fox McCloud]

thanks to boxrec.

Originally, but I have seen all of Floyd's fights, and have watched most of Cotto's opponents, at least the noteworthy ones. I'm still trying to catch up on most fighters remember. I'm trying to get there eventually.

[2501]

Mostly just ******s who think Ludacris is a good rapper.

I mean, the majority of them are probably pretty dumb and just hate, but there are some decent posters on here who think Floyd's resume is terrible, but never breathe a word about Cotto's.

I personally think both of their resumes are pretty good to be honest.

i think his resume pre WW is ATG material. he has an average WW resume. you disagree with that?

and if you tell me Ludacris doesnt rip it right here, then you lying son LYIN!

[Fox McCloud]

i think his resume pre WW is ATG material. he has an average WW resume. you disagree with that?

and if you tell me Ludacris doesnt rip it right here, then you lying son LYIN!

I do think his 147 resume is lacking...

I think the De La Hoya win at 154 is pretty decent, even though it isn't at WW. I also think the Hatton win is worth more than what most people give it credit for. I don't think the Judah win was a waste of time either. Is it any worse than Margarito would have been? If Mayweather had beaten Margarito and then Margarito lost to Williams, would people really be hailing it as a great victory?

[AntonTheMeh]

Cotto is far and away the clear #1 fighter to fight Floyd Mayweather Jr. according to everyone. I agree, completely. Anyone who says otherwise is dumb.

Most people agreed that Cotto deserved the shot more than Williams before Williams dropped his match against Quintana, even though most people agreed that Williams would be the tougher fight for Mayweather. That tells me that people are putting Cotto up in that spot because of his resume.

Here's my question:

How can people say that Floyd Mayweather's resume is an absolute joke, and he hasn't fought anyone good, but at the same time praise Cotto's resume?

Cotto has fought 4 common opponents (Juuko, Sosa, Corley and Judah).

Cotto's notable wins include (that aren't common opponents): Torres, Malignaggi, Quintana and Mosley.

Mayweather's notable wins include: Corrales, Chavez, Castillo, Castillo, De La Hoya and Hatton.

Now, honestly, I'm not saying Mayweather's resume blows Cotto's out of the water. It doesn't. But I am curious how people think that Mayweather's resume is absolute ****, but praise Cotto's to no end?

Do people honestly believe that Shane Mosley is that much better and closer to his prime than De La Hoya?

Do people actually think that wins over Malignaggi and Torres are great but can discredt Mayweather's win over Hatton? All of them are champions at 140, but Hatton is considered THE champion.

I will say that Cotto's stock rose a bunch when Quintana smacked Williams around, but people were talking about this exact same stuff even before that match took place.

At this point in time, I consider myself a much bigger fan of Cotto than Mayweather, but still, I am having trouble figuring out why people think Mayweather's resume is so bad, while Cotto's is good. I don't really see that much of a groundbreaking difference in level of competition to be honest.

i don't agree with this.i think some say it from each fan base in regard to the other fighter.

[C'MONMANG']

I do think his 147 resume is lacking...

I think the De La Hoya win at 154 is pretty decent, even though it isn't at WW. I also think the Hatton win is worth more than what most people give it credit for. I don't think the Judah win was a waste of time either. Is it any worse than Margarito would have been? If Mayweather had beaten Margarito and then Margarito lost to Williams, would people really be hailing it as a great victory?

UM yes..

judah was just beatin by Baldo... what had Judah done at WW? or jw FOR THAT MATTER..

Margo was the # 1 guy and wasnt given a shot..

[KingTito]

I just look at is as simply this. Mayweather and Cotto are #s 1 and 2. They should fight.

[Fox McCloud]

UM yes..

judah was just beatin by Baldo... what had Judah done at WW? or jw FOR THAT MATTER..

Margo was the # 1 guy and wasnt given a shot..

Judah beat Cory Spinks, who had 3 belts and the lineal/Ring title.

What had Margarito done up to that point at 147? Beat Cintron?

I guess I just don't see what everyone else does in Margarito's resume. I personally think that there is nothing special about it, nor is there anything exceptional about how Margarito fights. Although he is one of the top guys, I doubt that people are going to praise Floyd for beating him if he ever does 10 years down the line.

[frankpaganini]

Cotto is far and away the clear #1 fighter to fight Floyd Mayweather Jr. according to everyone. I agree, completely. Anyone who says otherwise is dumb.

Most people agreed that Cotto deserved the shot more than Williams before Williams dropped his match against Quintana, even though most people agreed that Williams would be the tougher fight for Mayweather. That tells me that people are putting Cotto up in that spot because of his resume.

Here's my question:

How can people say that Floyd Mayweather's resume is an absolute joke, and he hasn't fought anyone good, but at the same time praise Cotto's resume?

Cotto has fought 4 common opponents (Juuko, Sosa, Corley and Judah).

Cotto's notable wins include (that aren't common opponents): Torres, Malignaggi, Quintana and Mosley.

Mayweather's notable wins include: Corrales, Chavez, Castillo, Castillo, De La Hoya and Hatton.

Now, honestly, I'm not saying Mayweather's resume blows Cotto's out of the water. It doesn't. But I am curious how people think that Mayweather's resume is absolute ****, but praise Cotto's to no end?

Do people honestly believe that Shane Mosley is that much better and closer to his prime than De La Hoya?

Do people actually think that wins over Malignaggi and Torres are great but can discredt Mayweather's win over Hatton? All of them are champions at 140, but Hatton is considered THE champion.

I will say that Cotto's stock rose a bunch when Quintana smacked Williams around, but people were talking about this exact same stuff even before that match took place.

At this point in time, I consider myself a much bigger fan of Cotto than Mayweather, but still, I am having trouble figuring out why people think Mayweather's resume is so bad, while Cotto's is good. I don't really see that much of a groundbreaking difference in level of competition to be honest.

Thats the point exactly...Mayweather's resume isnt bad.

not bad at all...

infact its a very good resume.

some of his opponents he fought (like de la hoya) can be considered out of their prime and simply just a "name" on his resume but the same can be said about mosley on cotto's record.

each fighter has fought good competition...

but floyd's resume is no joke...and either is cotto's.

mayweather beat castillo and corrales which is a big plus in my book...

cotto has beat malignaggi (mayweather's less talented counterpart style-wise)

cotto beat quintana (and quintana proved he IS a legit fighter by beating williams).

but to answer your question; i think mayweather's resume is very legit.

hatton (he recent fight) is no over the hill fighter...hatton is a very game fighter who wasnt 43 and 0 for nothing.

he was simply just better than hatton...

period.

so people shouldnt dismiss either fighter's resume.