Too much emphasis on the '0'

[big paulie]

There are some clowns here completely writing Cotto off simply because he is no longer undefeated, the fight kept alive the famouse Mex/Rican rivalry and did past bouts such as Sanchez v Gomez proud, both of those fighters incidently had losses on thier records, as did Margarito, 3 losses in his first 12 bouts i believe without checking, have they made him any lesser a fighter? Of course not, he has just stopped Miguel Cotto, instead they undoubtedly helped him become the fighter he is. Ray Robinson, Joe Louis, Ali, Leonard, Duran, Archie Moore, all considered all time greats all have multiple losses. Old school matchmakers will tell you that having the '0' generally meant that you were untested and that these days the television giants crave undefeated fighters because they are far more marketable, this has led to a decrease in truly competetive, evenly matched bouts in recent years. Yes there are exceptions, just like Cotto v Margarito, and both fighters (and promoter) should be applauded by us all

[MANGLER]

It's obviously better to never lose, but losin can help a fighter sometimes. Cotto's young enough that he can come back.

[big paulie]

It's obviously better to never lose, but losin can help a fighter sometimes. Cotto's young enough that he can come back.

I agree on both fronts, Mayweather is a fantastic advert for the sport and a massive part of his appeal/marketability was that he was undefeated, and Cotto will be back

[Del Coqui]

When you go after the best it happens

[ELPacman]

I don't believe in undefeated fighters for the most part. It just means they haven't met their match yet, or haven't been challenged *cough*fraud*cough. When you come back from a loss after being undefeated for so long, that's how you really see what kind of fighter he really is. True champions come back from losses to only better themselves. Look at Pacquiao. 2 early career KOs and now he's gone on to legendary status. It's all about how you can come back, and how you can improve from your loss. People like Lacy, example of how you are done from 1 loss. Mentally, he's ****ed.

[JAB5239]

It's obviously better to never lose, but losin can help a fighter sometimes. Cotto's young enough that he can come back.

I agree on both fronts, Mayweather is a fantastic advert for the sport and a massive part of his appeal/marketability was that he was undefeated, and Cotto will be back

I just laugh when people write off a fighter when he loses to another top fighter. Was hearns overrated for losing to Leonard? Leonard to Duran? And countless others. Its absurd to write a guy off or call him overrated until you see how he comes back and how his career plays out after already being a proven commodity.

[dobermann28]

you dont mind if a fighter looses?? but hatton is treated on here like ****ing hitler!!!!

i dont care if a great figher losses a few,as long as they are good to watch!!

like margirito!!

[big paulie]

you dont mind if a fighter looses?? but hatton is treated on here like ****ing hitler!!!!

i dont care if a great figher losses a few,as long as they are good to watch!!

like margirito!!

Totally agree with the Margo part but Hatton is a great example of what i was talking about, a carefully matched fighter with a great record just didnt prepare him for FMJ, perhaps if he had had a tougher apprentishipe under Warren maybe he would have fared better, i doubt it though. Yes he fought Tzsyu and Castillo but both were past it, lesser fighters but in thier prime gave Hatton tough nights

[dobermann28]

Totally agree with the Margo part but Hatton is a great example of what i was talking about, a carefully matched fighter with a great record just didnt prepare him for FMJ, perhaps if he had had a tougher apprentishipe under Warren maybe he would have fared better, i doubt it though. Yes he fought Tzsyu and Castillo but both were past it, lesser fighters but in thier prime gave Hatton tough nights

i know what you mean! i am a hatton fan but i concede he did not fight really good fighters until he left warren(because warren is a ****** beady eyed ****face!!!)

i also think your right the fighters he fought were not on PBF level ever!!

but i do think he is a p4p fighter with great power and speed...and with only one loss he is still a fighter people should be scared of.

i think people are writing him off to early...especially after the lazcano fight.

people seem to forget he won every round...but a little(and i mean very little)stumble people are calling him past it.

thanks for the reply....

[dobermann28]

p.s. I ****ING HATE FRANK WARREN!!!!!!!

i think khan will be a product of his ****ing hype machine and will soon fall short!

people are comparing him to hatton(because he will surley step up soon to light welter)but the diffrence with hatton is he could handle world class fighters with his chin speed and power.

i dont think khan has either in a great deal....he will fall sooner or later....for good!