Clarification: Cotto The Boxer

[Addison]

Please tell me you just didn't compare Margarito to Saddler.

Normally you are a pretty reasonable guy, but lately its seems like Margarito's semen is slowly leaking out of your ass.

Saying Margarito has very good boxing ability? Comparing Margarito to Sandy Saddler? Margarito is an extremely accurate puncher? Jesus, what is next? Margarito fathered Tye Fields? Give me a break!

I didn't compare Margarito to Saddler, mentally handicapped one..

Of course there's no objection coming from you that I compared Cotto to Pep.

[abadger]

Cotto has shown more versatility than Hatton in his career so the thought of Cotto appearing more "one dimensional" than Hatton at Floyd's hands has me questioning your knowledge on the subject.

Cotto is more versatile than Hatton, I agree with you, but I am talking about how he will look against Mayweather. For me Cotto is not as good a pure pressure fighter as Ricky Hatton, he is both slower and more predictable in his approach to that tactic. Where Ricky bounces from side to side, Cotto plods forward. Cotto's pressure will not be as effective against Floyd as Ricky's was (at first) and Mayweather will not have to unleash anything more exciting than potshots to deal with it.

So then we have Cotto relying on his more 'rounded' skills to beat Floyd, and quite simply he has no chance of doing this. However good he is perceived to be he is not even as good a boxer as De La Hoya, let alone Mayweather. Cotto's 'rounded' boxing skills will count for nothing against Floyd because he won't even get close to making them count.

So what I am saying is this: yes Cotto has more all around talent than Hatton, yes if the two were to fight Cotto would probably win, but stylistically the way that Cotto fights is better for Floyd than Hatton was. To beat Hatton Mayweather had to KTFO him, against Cotto he won't have to, Cotto will be easier to contain and his game easier to nullify.

[!! Shawn]

I didn't compare Margarito to Saddler, mentally handicapped one..

Of course there's no objection coming from you that I compared Cotto to Pep.

I want the old Addison back! Who is this cum slurping Margarito fanatic that has high-jacked his account?

[Addison]

I want the old Addison back! Who is this cum slurping Margarito fanatic that has high-jacked his account?

Har har har, Jokey Smurf.. You come here for social reasons, right?

Haven't discovered girls yet, eh Shawn?

[Thread Stealer]

Cotto is more versatile than Hatton, I agree with you, but I am talking about how he will look against Mayweather. For me Cotto is not as good a pure pressure fighter as Ricky Hatton, he is both slower and more predictable in his approach to that tactic. Where Ricky bounces from side to side, Cotto plods forward. Cotto's pressure will not be as effective against Floyd as Ricky's was (at first) and Mayweather will not have to unleash anything more exciting than potshots to deal with it.

So then we have Cotto relying on his more 'rounded' skills to beat Floyd, and quite simply he has no chance of doing this. However good he is perceived to be he is not even as good a boxer as De La Hoya, let alone Mayweather. Cotto's 'rounded' boxing skills will count for nothing against Floyd because he won't even get close to making them count.

So what I am saying is this: yes Cotto has more all around talent than Hatton, yes if the two were to fight Cotto would probably win, but stylistically the way that Cotto fights is better for Floyd than Hatton was. To beat Hatton Mayweather had to KTFO him, against Cotto he won't have to, Cotto will be easier to contain and his game easier to nullify.

Cotto presents a different challenge and sort of pressure than Hatton. Cotto is a bigger guy, better jab, his combos are more fluid, better boxing skills and has that peek-a-boo defense, and he's more methodical. Hatton has quicker feet, hands (single shots at least) and comes right at you with a more swarming style. He looks to break and re-start the action with his clinches. He gives you less time to set up and re-set. He also throws punches from different angles, thanks in part to how quickly he can pivot and change positions.

I think Cotto will fare better versus Mayweather than Hatton did, but we'll have to wait and see if and when it ever happens (I think it will in 2009)

[abadger]

Cotto presents a different challenge and sort of pressure than Hatton. Cotto is a bigger guy, better jab, his combos are more fluid, better boxing skills and has that peek-a-boo defense, and he's more methodical. Hatton has quicker feet, hands (single shots at least) and comes right at you with a more swarming style. He looks to break and re-start the action with his clinches. He gives you less time to set up and re-set. He also throws punches from different angles, thanks in part to how quickly he can pivot and change positions.

I think Cotto will fare better versus Mayweather than Hatton did, but we'll have to wait and see if and when it ever happens (I think it will in 2009)

I agree with everything you say. Cotto's single biggest chance in the fight is that his size allows him to take whatever Mayweather has to give and as you say, just methodically keep working on Floyd. I don't think it will work out like that though, as I've said, such an approach is exactly what De La Hoya attempted.

As for Cotto looking better, well it would be hard not to, wouldn't it? He won't get KO'd and embarassed, but I think Floyd's potshot game will be enough to beat him, which it wouldn't have been against Hatton.

[Boricua6]

'Cotto the boxer' is definitely a new opinion. I've watched it appear on these boards over say the last year. Cotto has appeared to be improving, but his fans now talk of him as a 'do everything' boxer with excellent speed, power, technique and aggression. The reality is that Cotto is a good pressure fighter who has added a little patience and tactical astuteness to his game. We sometimes tend to forget that all elite level boxers tend to have good baseline boxing skills underpinning whatever their own particular strength is, and we shouldn't get carried away when they demonstrate them.

I think this 'Cotto is complete' idea actually has little to do with Cotto himself and much more to do with his status as Mayweather's number 1 challenger. We have started looking at Cotto and asking ourselves not "what does he do?" but "how does he match up to Mayweather?" and it leads us to seize upon small areas of his game and blow them up into key features, because if he didn't have them, then how could he beat Floyd?

I'm pretty sure that when Cotto does finally get into the ring he will be made to look quite one-dimensional, maybe even more than Hatton did. I predict a fairly easy decision for Floyd, with Floyd not having to extend himself a great deal, which say what you like, he did against Hatton. It will look like the Oscar v Floyd fight, but won't be as close.

I remember many posters here, myself included, talking hatton up as 'complete' in the same way Cotto is being talked up now. I don't think we should make the same mistakes again.

Lots of thought went into this and I agree that you have to respect the effort. To say that Cotto will be exposed as more one-dimensional than Hatton is mind boggling. Would you would say that Cotto would have lost to Luis Collazo???? At 147, Hatton hasn't demonstrated that he can deal with decent slick boxers to date - Cotto has.

Very interested in listening to some evidence as to why Floyd would have an easier time with Cotto than with Hatton/DLH.

[Boricua6]

Lots of thought went into this and I agree that you have to respect the effort. To say that Cotto will be exposed as more one-dimensional than Hatton is mind boggling. Would you would say that Cotto would have lost to Luis Collazo???? At 147, Hatton hasn't demonstrated that he can deal with decent slick boxers to date - Cotto has.

Very interested in listening to some evidence as to why Floyd would have an easier time with Cotto than with Hatton/DLH.

Abadger,
Apologize, you posted twice before I finished mine. Copy all the above. Thanks for the insight

[oldgringo]

For abadger:

For me Cotto is not as good a pure pressure fighter as Ricky Hatton, he is both slower and more predictable in his approach to that tactic. Where Ricky bounces from side to side, Cotto plods forward.

I think this is incorrect, especially when considering the opponent. Hatton is a smothering type of pressure fighter. He'd make his way in with head movement and good footwork, leaping in with a left (or any punch for that matter) to the head/body, following up with rough housing, short body shots inside and chopping head shots. This went over fairly well against Floyd, until Floyd adjusted to it. After Hatton started to slow down in that fight his tactics had an adverse effect. He started smothering himself and his lack of an arsenal really showed up. This is exactly why Floyd caught him with that perfect hook and knocked him silly. Ricky was as predictable as the word gets, leaping in with a desperate shot.

Cotto's footwork when pressuring his opponent is excellent. Calling him a plodder is well off base. Cotto may not have the foot speed of Hatton, but he also likes to fight from a different distance than Ricky. Cotto has very deliberate footwork which virtually always puts him into a position to punch and control space. He cuts that ring off as well as anyone today. This is why his most undervalued trait is his ability to control space.

In addition to this, Cotto rarely smothers himself and throws a variety of punches to the head and body. The Quintana fight is the best recent example of this I can think of. The distance, the punches, the angles...all calculated and very effective.

So then we have Cotto relying on his more 'rounded' skills to beat Floyd, and quite simply he has no chance of doing this. However good he is perceived to be he is not even as good a boxer as De La Hoya, let alone Mayweather. Cotto's 'rounded' boxing skills will count for nothing against Floyd because he won't even get close to making them count.

What? You could have shortened this part to, "Cotto's skill will count for nothing against Floyd and he will lose badly." Save yourself some time.

So what I am saying is this: yes Cotto has more all around talent than Hatton, yes if the two were to fight Cotto would probably win, but stylistically the way that Cotto fights is better for Floyd than Hatton was. To beat Hatton Mayweather had to KTFO him, against Cotto he won't have to, Cotto will be easier to contain and his game easier to nullify.

The funny thing here is that Cotto fights no particular way against a given opponent. Save maybe one or two fights, Cotto changes his approach in-fight and adapts to what his opponent is doing. This is something Floyd is very well known for as well (and rightfully so).

Saying, "stylistically Cotto is a better fight for Floyd", is totally wrong in my opinion considering Cotto is a guy who adapts throughout fights. Also considering he is significantly stronger and more well-balanced than is Hatton. When you couple these ideas with the fact that Cotto fights well behind his jab (which Ricky somewhat lacks) and can cause damage even with blocked/glancing shots, I think he presents a tougher match for Floyd.

[abadger]

Abadger,
Apologize, you posted twice before I finished mine. Copy all the above. Thanks for the insight

No need to apologise, it was a valid question. I appreciate any poster who manages to disagree without flaming and actually asks for the other posters opinion though. Nice one.