Magarito, Cotto.. would he have still won

**MANGLER** · 04-28-2009, 02:58 PM

I thought he woulda won anyway. Old news tho.

**Eaner0919** · 04-28-2009, 03:09 PM

welcome to thread #4567554 of the same freaking topic

**Ravishing** · 04-28-2009, 03:22 PM

Tough to say

Cotto was very accurate with his punches and landed very hard shots that possibly could've knocked out any other welterweight at that time. But to Margarito's credit, he has a chin made of granite. I do think that Cotto was trying a bit too hard to KO Margarito instead of trying to control the pace of the fight. He took some tough shots from Margarito but still seem to be in the fight.

If you add the Plaster of Paris scandal to the mix, it adds an entirely different scenario being that if Margarito did use them, it shows Cotto's heart beyond a shadow of a doubt for taking such brutal shots while still being able to land flush shots on Margarito. It's a scar on Boxing we may never have full closure on unless someone spills the beans.

The question at hand is if Margarito didn't use Plaster, would Cotto have taken those shots much better and possibly have gone to win a decision victory?

**boxingsmash69** · 04-28-2009, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by Ravishing

Tough to say

Cotto was very accurate with his punches and landed very hard shots that possibly could've knocked out any other welterweight at that time. But to Margarito's credit, he has a chin made of granite. I do think that Cotto was trying a bit too hard to KO Margarito instead of trying to control the pace of the fight. He took some tough shots from Margarito but still seem to be in the fight.

If you add the Plaster of Paris scandal to the mix, it adds an entirely different scenario being that if Margarito did use them, it shows Cotto's heart beyond a shadow of a doubt for taking such brutal shots while still being able to land flush shots on Margarito. It's a scar on Boxing we may never have full closure on unless someone spills the beans.

The question at hand is if Margarito didn't use Plaster, would Cotto have taken those shots much better and possibly have gone to win a decision victory?

That is officially the question of the century.

**F l i c k e r** · 04-28-2009, 03:27 PM

Margarito never had substance in his wraps for the Cotto fight.

Dont be ******. He was proven to attempting to use "substance" in the Mosley fight. Not Cotto.

**Ravishing** · 04-28-2009, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by F l i c k e r

Margarito never had substance in his wraps for the Cotto fight.

Dont be ******. He was proven to attempting to use "substance" in the Mosley fight. Not Cotto.

This could be true

But in life everything isn't always that black and white. One could easily assume Margarito being the #1 Weltwerweight in the World didn't need to use them against a presumed "Over the Hill" Shane Mosley, but he indeed was caught prior to the fight. If he was going to use them against someone who many believed he would beat, what would make someone assume that he wouldn't use them in his biggest fight against the #1 Welterweight at the time?

For instance, if a person is selling narcotics and is randomly caught, would your everyday judgement tell you he was selling narcotics prior to being caught?

**ottoevans** · 04-28-2009, 03:40 PM

yea regardless of the plaster. Margarito couldnt miss with his punches and Cotto couldnt hurt Marg.

**Mr. Fantastic** · 04-28-2009, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by Eaner0919

welcome to thread #4567554 of the same freaking topic

Exactly!!!

**F l i c k e r** · 04-28-2009, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by Ravishing

This could be true

But in life everything isn't always that black and white. One could easily assume Margarito being the #1 Weltwerweight in the World didn't need to use them against a presumed "Over the Hill" Shane Mosley, but he indeed was caught prior to the fight. If he was going to use them against someone who many believed he would beat, what would make someone assume that he wouldn't use them in his biggest fight against the #1 Welterweight at the time?

For instance, if a person is selling narcotics and is randomly caught, would your everyday judgement tell you he was selling narcotics prior to being caught?

Yeah but we cant accuse for using it before either. Like your example. He was caught that time but he wont be charged as a drug lord(someone that detectives know, for a fact, have sold drugs numerous times).

Since the law says innocent till proven guilty. We cant legitimately say that he used plaster before this incident.

Magarito, Cotto.. would he have still won