Tweet
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! 
One is only called a "hater" when the opposing view has nothing credible or substantial to offer in rebuttal.
Why ask me who Cotto "should have fought"?
He should have fought champions who were at the top and defending their titles. That's who the fcuk he should have fought. He should have done something significant to establish a legacy instead of waiting for Bob Arum to set up future vacant title fights. That's what the fcuk he should have done.
There is no excuse for EXCLUSIVELY competing for vacant belts to make your case as a top 140lbs and 147lb fighter.
Some of you act as if this is so because I made it that way. I didn't. Go check Cotto's record and see for yourselves.
I just brought out facts when opinions where your weapons of choice. You brought a knife to a gun fight and then accuse me of being a "hater" because I shut down any other recourse any of you simpletons might have .. that is, aside from posting videos of pundits sharing their own opinions about who is great.
You peasants are nutsack jockeys because you CANNOT stand on your own and formulate a thought or opinion that isn't completely predicated on someone else's OPINION.
Unbelievable. Grown men on this forum crying like women because Cotto wasn't even as dominant as Laila Ali.
I'm amused at the way some of you think that you can debate facts and figures in an attempt to change how they are perceived.
You can't. You can post a video of Muhammad Ali saying that Cotto is the greatest and it still doesn't make it so.
A boxer has to actually DO SOMETHING EXTRAORDINARY to be considered great.
Beat a HOF while that HOF is prime.
Beat a legitimate P4P#1 fighter.
Unify a division one belt at a time against the other champions.
Remain undefeated in a career facing the top competition. Top competition being those ranked #1, 2 or 3 in a division.
Win a world title FROM A CHAMPION and defend that title at least 10 times and show some longevity. Winning a title only to be beaten in your next fight eight months later IS NOT GREAT.
I don't know what era of boxing some of you grew up watching and attending, but I can't think of a time when the bar was set as low as some of you suggest it should be set for Cotto to be seen as great for what he's done so far.
This is some of the most insane crap I've ever read. Hahahaha.
Some of you would do well to go rewatch Cotto's fights. Then go take a look at his record:
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...3535&cat=boxer
You obviously can't handle hearing the truth from me. Maybe reading it on a website will lessen the blow for some of you.
Good luck with that.
One is only called a "hater" when the opposing view has nothing credible or substantial to offer in rebuttal.
Why ask me who Cotto "should have fought"?
He should have fought champions who were at the top and defending their titles. That's who the fcuk he should have fought. He should have done something significant to establish a legacy instead of waiting for Bob Arum to set up future vacant title fights. That's what the fcuk he should have done.
There is no excuse for EXCLUSIVELY competing for vacant belts to make your case as a top 140lbs and 147lb fighter.
Some of you act as if this is so because I made it that way. I didn't. Go check Cotto's record and see for yourselves.
I just brought out facts when opinions where your weapons of choice. You brought a knife to a gun fight and then accuse me of being a "hater" because I shut down any other recourse any of you simpletons might have .. that is, aside from posting videos of pundits sharing their own opinions about who is great.
You peasants are nutsack jockeys because you CANNOT stand on your own and formulate a thought or opinion that isn't completely predicated on someone else's OPINION.
Unbelievable. Grown men on this forum crying like women because Cotto wasn't even as dominant as Laila Ali.
I'm amused at the way some of you think that you can debate facts and figures in an attempt to change how they are perceived.
You can't. You can post a video of Muhammad Ali saying that Cotto is the greatest and it still doesn't make it so.
A boxer has to actually DO SOMETHING EXTRAORDINARY to be considered great.
Beat a HOF while that HOF is prime.
Beat a legitimate P4P#1 fighter.
Unify a division one belt at a time against the other champions.
Remain undefeated in a career facing the top competition. Top competition being those ranked #1, 2 or 3 in a division.
Win a world title FROM A CHAMPION and defend that title at least 10 times and show some longevity. Winning a title only to be beaten in your next fight eight months later IS NOT GREAT.
I don't know what era of boxing some of you grew up watching and attending, but I can't think of a time when the bar was set as low as some of you suggest it should be set for Cotto to be seen as great for what he's done so far.
This is some of the most insane crap I've ever read. Hahahaha.
Some of you would do well to go rewatch Cotto's fights. Then go take a look at his record:
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...3535&cat=boxer
You obviously can't handle hearing the truth from me. Maybe reading it on a website will lessen the blow for some of you. Good luck with that.
Comment