How much did Cotto really risk?

[Big_L]

I said that Clottey had LITTLE to gain by fighting Cotto. Clottey should have been in line to fight Pacquiao, not Cotto. By all rights that fight with Pacquiao was Joshua's fight. Cotto only got his shot at Margarito because of his win over Mosley, who at the time hadn't done anything significant at WW in years. Clottey beat Zab Judah, whose career at the time wasn't much worse off than Mosley's.

The difference is that Clottey hadn't lost. He shouldn't have had to fight Cotto when he had 5 solid wins since his last loss.

Cotto had nothing to lose because he was considered damaged after the bloody beating he took from Margarito. Another loss wasn't going to hurt his career any worse than the public beating he took in that fight.

In fact, Cotto is still perceived as a shell of his former self. He's taken on soft touches like Foreman and Margarito, who had been caught cheating and had a damaged orbital bone that Cotto targeted all night.

Cotto has been established for years. Why do you think it is that his team is bringing him along slowly like some prospect trying to get some experience?

Do you think its because they DON'T think he's damaged?

LOL .. think about it.

So you give Cotto credit for beating Judah like you do Clottey?

Fact is nobody cared about Clottey before. Nobody outside of the boxing world knew who he was. He got to fight Cotto in a packed MSG in the biggest fight of his career and made the biggest purse of his career at that time. And because of that he got Pacquiao next. You really think he would have ever gotten Pacquiao with that Cotto fight? He gained everything from that fight. And Cotto risked Pacquiao by fighting a dangerous unknown. He could have went from Jennings and just waited and still got Pacquiao.

[Brother Jay]

Did Barrera fight for the title? No. Did Cotto have to win a fight in order to be called champion? Yes. Would you call Sergio the MW champion even though he was stripped and they gave the belt to Chavez? He doesn't have the belt, so how can he be the champion? Who gives a **** Cotto gets in the ring and either beats a dood up or gets beat the **** up, you sit behind a keyboard. Even if Cotto fought tomato cans all year he's still way more badass than you, true story.

So if I make an analysis concerning thoroughbreds, because I can't beat any of them in a race means that I shouldn't make observations and discuss them?

Why must you make your ******ity a public matter for me to put on display?

And you're behind a keyboard just like me, ****brick.

However the difference between you and I is that you're reading and replying to MY ****, not the other way around because I(and apparently most others) don't give half a fcuk about what you think otherwise.

Also a true story.

[Beater_of_ass]

So if I make an analysis concerning thoroughbreds, because I can't beat any of them in a race means that I shouldn't make observations and discuss them?

Why must you make your ******ity a public matter for me to put on display?

And you're behind a keyboard just like me, ****brick.

However the difference between you and I is that you're reading and replying to MY ****, not the other way around because I(and apparently most others) don't give half a fcuk about what you think otherwise.

Also a true story.

You just read and replied to my **** dumbass... BWAHAHAHA!!!!! Cotto would still kick your ass, its just my superior intellectual scary avatar thoughts man. Can't I do that, give my opinion on Cotto vs Brother Jay, I'm just gonna say I got Cotto by one jab to the face.

[Bootneck]

LOL .. well genius .. have you factored in that to be a recognized champion you have to beat a recognized champion?

By your reasoning, Barrera was a legitimate champion when Morales vacated the WBC title to go up to FW and the WBO title was "reawarded" to Barrera with no fight involved.

Proof: http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:23605

According to your logic, it was still a world championship belt .... RIGHT?

Think about that for a while before you reply. Muster up some brain power before you just type out some emotional bull****.

it's still a world championship belt.

what you're talking about is a lineal or ring world championship belts. those are more meaningful.

but vacant or otherwise it's still a world title.

just how it is in boxing. welcome to the sport.


a world championship belt is a world championship belt. you can argue it's a paper belt , that's fine but it is what it is.


some people are so ******.

i don't care for cotto , i don't care much for cotto's paper belts , don't think too highly of his titles.....

and even then , i still think you're a moron.

[Brother Jay]

Little to gain? To this date, the majority of people view the Cotto win as Pacquiao finest moment. He took apart and dismantled a highly skilled boxer.

How do you know its the majority? Is there a poll?

LOL .. anyway .. There was little to gain because Cotto was damaged goods who had lost his title and had to get a vacant belt from who?

I dare you to tell me that you've EVER watched Michael Jennings fight!

In truth, the only thing that Cotto brought to the table was a belt that Pacquiao could win. Had Cotto not won that vacant belt, he, like every other WW Pacquiao fought, would have nothing to legitimize Manny's WW campaign.

And to the Clottey fight, I understand the dirty part to some degree, but Clottey butting someone almost everytime he fights is dirty fighting to me.

So because Clottey had been dirty in previous fights, that somehow means that it was okay for Cotto to get dirty in their fight where no fouls had been committed? didn't your parents ever tell you that two wrongs don't make a right? That was weak, dude. Very weak, indeed.

I also think Arum was planning on match Cotto and Pacquiao before the Clottey fight, but I don't see the sacrificial lamb part.

Let me help you get it!

Cotto was only offered that match against Jennings to win a belt to give Manny Pacquiao something legitimize his efforts in the welterweight division. Without that vacant belt, what WW title would Pacquiao have ever won? By no means was Manny going to actually fight a winning champion. So he had Arum orchestrate the next best thing.

Cotto had a much bigger fan base than Clottey. So with the vacant belt and his fanbase Cotto was the natural choice for Pacquiao's next opponent. That and he was willing to cut weight to make a catchweight that Manny did not need.

Basically, Team Pacquiao stipulated EVERY advantage that they could and knew that Cotto could not refuse because he was on the comeback trail. A win over Pacquiao at that point would have resuscitated Miguel's questionable status to top form. And Miguel wasn't going to get that kind of payday anywhere else with his then state of affairs.

Miguel chased the carrot in hopes that he still had what it took to compete at the top level after taking such a brutal beating at the hands of Margarito.

He didn't.

Oddsmakers didn't believe he did. Many fans didn't believe that he did. The writers and commentators didn't believe that he did.

So he took what Arum made easy for him to get and then got slaughtered a second time at the hands of Manny Pacquiao.

That's how he got played as a sacrificial lamb, young man.

In hindsight you can make that point, but before the fight, Cotto had plenty of supporters thinking he had a legit shot to win.

LOL .. just not the oddsmakers. And the smart money listens when the oddsmakers speak.

[Bootneck]

brother jay , do you consider joe frazier a world champion?

[Brother Jay]

You just read and replied to my **** dumbass... BWAHAHAHA!!!!! Cotto would still kick your ass, its just my superior intellectual scary avatar thoughts man. Can't I do that, give my opinion on Cotto vs Brother Jay, I'm just gonna say I got Cotto by one jab to the face.

I'll converse with anyone if they have something worthwhile to say.

So you come here to do what? Tell me that a pro fighter could beat me in a boxing match? To say that even though Cotto dodged reigning champions for 99% of his career he still won some belts .. vacant or not?

What's your point?

Do you even have one?

Or are you just in lonely mode looking to win friends and influence people?

Unless you have something worthy to say passed this point, you're on time out.

[Brother Jay]

it's still a world championship belt.

what you're talking about is a lineal or ring world championship belts. those are more meaningful.

but vacant or otherwise it's still a world title.

just how it is in boxing. welcome to the sport.


a world championship belt is a world championship belt. you can argue it's a paper belt , that's fine but it is what it is.


some people are so ******.

i don't care for cotto , i don't care much for cotto's paper belts , don't think too highly of his titles.....

and even then , i still think you're a moron.

Well thank God that what you think has no bearing on anything but your own ******ity then, huh?

Let me school you for a moment, little peasant ....

Vacant title = not having fought a reigning champion for the distinction of being called a champion. Champions become champions by beating other champions.

Why is that important?

Well because if championships were no longer important, then journeymen could conceivably compete against each other for vacant belts and then get ranked in the top 3 without ever having beaten a world class fighter!

At that point, what difference would it make how good or dominant you've been? It would be all about who gets granted the opportunity based on nothing but being granted the opportunity.

Rank would be absolutely meaningless at that point.

All thanks to worthless fans like you that abide dumb **** like that and allow greedy promoters and networks to further corrupt the sport.

I would boycott boxing .. the sport that I love .. before I would support garbage and bait and switch tactics.

You on the other hand are saying dumb **** like "just how it is in boxing. welcome to the sport."

[Bootneck]

Well thank God that what you think has no bearing on anything but your own ******ity then, huh?

Let me school you for a moment, little peasant ....

Vacant title = not having fought a reigning champion for the distinction of being called a champion. Champions become champions by beating other champions.

Why is that important?

Well because if championships were no longer important, then journeymen could conceivably compete against each other for vacant belts and then get ranked in the top 3 without ever having beaten a world class fighter!

At that point, what difference would it make how good or dominant you've been? It would be all about who gets granted the opportunity based on nothing but being granted the opportunity.

Rank would be absolutely meaningless at that point.

All thanks to worthless fans like you that abide dumb **** like that and allow greedy promoters and networks to further corrupt the sport.

I would boycott boxing .. the sport that I love .. before I would support garbage and bait and switch tactics.

You on the other hand are saying dumb **** like "just how it is in boxing. welcome to the sport."

no. vacant titles means there is no champion.

world champion is a person who has a world title.


and yes that ruins the definition of a champion but it is what is.


in the end that's why you look at a fighters resume to judge him and not ****** titles.


cotto's "championships" are weak because of the quality of the opponents he beat to get them.

in the end that's what matters. who did you beat?

not whether the title was vacant or not.

you could be fighting the best guy in the division for that vacant title.

and you could be fighting some scrub champion for a non-vacant one.

[Bootneck]

i'll ask again , brother gay.

do you consider joe frazier a world champion?


joe frazier won a vacant wbc belt.

he also won the wba belt from jimmy ellis who won the vacant wba belt.