Cotto vs Mayweather=Gatti vs Mayweather?

[IronDanHamza]

You don't even know what I am talking about. At the time when Mayweather fought Castillo, Castillo was over hyped and his p4p ranking was not deserving. What he went on to do afterwards has no bearing of where he was ranked in 2001. In comparison Shane Mosley in 2007, was a better win.

His win over the #1 ranked fighter at Lightweight was why he was ranked #1 when Mayweather fought him.

The second fight was close, probably should have gone to Johnston. But still, their 2 fights showed what they were capable of.

That aside, what does that even matter?

What he went on to do merely a year or two onwards showed even further how good he was.

And, that fighter in his prime is better than Mosley in 07. It's that simple.

No matter how you try and spin it.

[IronDanHamza]

So what? Well it's good for your side of the debate because Castillo did well towards the end of his career. You get to give credit to Floyd for something he didn't do. What happens when a fighter suffers towards the end of his career though, like Shane. So if Alvarez gets him in May, he gets discredited because Shane is old and past it and all previous things are poo poo'd. It's a double standard and I'll never go on to give credit to fighters after they matchup with that opponent.

Castillo regained the Lightweight Title not much longer than a year after he lost to Mayweather.

Something Mayweather didn't do? He beat him in his prime. Waht Castillo did after that just adds to how good the win is. Can you not grasp that?

What Shane did in his prime doesn't mean much to the 07 version.

The fact of the matter is beating a prime Castillo is better than beating Mosley in 2007.

[Check]

Castillo regained the Lightweight Title not much longer than a year after he lost to Mayweather.

Something Mayweather didn't do? He beat him in his prime. Waht Castillo did after that just adds to how good the win is. Can you not grasp that?

What Shane did in his prime doesn't mean much to the 07 version.

The fact of the matter is beating a prime Castillo is better than beating Mosley in 2007.

No I get what you are saying and a lot of people think that way but I don't. Just because Mayweather beat Castillo in an era where his prime was starting shouldn't automatically mean that Mayweather gets more credit for that victory. When Castillo matched up with Mayweather he had just came off two fights with Johnston. Whether you think he won or loss is up to debate but he certainly didn't light Johnston up. Whos to say that after Castillo fought Mayweather he learned and got better. This happens a lot and it isn't because Mayweather is this guy that makes fighters better.

For example the Duran that beat Leonard, simply didn't beat the best Leonard but he should get praise for beating Leonard....I don't think so. Leonard learned a ton from their first meeting in Montreal and became a more complete fighter because of it. That's why I'll never say Duran beating Leonard in the first fight was that special.

[Check]

Don't get me wrong though. Duran beating Leonard was a good win because it's still Leonard and so is Floyd beating Castillo but it isn't as great as a lot of people make it out to be. Fighters change, good or bad and you need to separate it from their one on one matchups.

[jtcs1981]

I see this fight looking like the bruselles one but more competitive

Cotto is nothing like Bruseles.

[STREET CLEANER]

What kind of comparison. Gatti had heart and better power (one punch KO power).

Cotto has the better legs, defense and his jab is better than any jab that Gotti threw.

Also when Gatti fought Floyd I thought that McGirt used the wrong tactic in trying to get Gatti to be more technical in that fight

[IronDanHamza]

No I get what you are saying and a lot of people think that way but I don't. Just because Mayweather beat Castillo in an era where his prime was starting shouldn't automatically mean that Mayweather gets more credit for that victory. When Castillo matched up with Mayweather he had just came off two fights with Johnston. Whether you think he won or loss is up to debate but he certainly didn't light Johnston up. Whos to say that after Castillo fought Mayweather he learned and got better. This happens a lot and it isn't because Mayweather is this guy that makes fighters better.

Why not watch his fights and look?

Castillo in 2002 and Castillo in 2004 are the same fighter.

For example the Duran that beat Leonard, simply didn't beat the best Leonard but he should get praise for beating Leonard....I don't think so. Leonard learned a ton from their first meeting in Montreal and became a more complete fighter because of it. That's why I'll never say Duran beating Leonard in the first fight was that special.

Sheer ******ity.

You actually are going to claim that Ray Leonard wasn't in his prime in 1980? Seriously?

When will you people realise that the way he fought Duran in the second fight was not how Leonard usually fought before and after that fight?

Ray Leonard was absolutely in his prime in 1980. The Welterweight Champion with a stoppage victory over an ATG in Wilfred Benitez.

Saying Duran, a Lightweight, moving up to Welterweight to beat one of the greatest Welterweight's in the history of the sport is "Not that special" then you need to re-analyse things.

[Boxer1590]

Cotto is nothing like Bruseles.

This comparison is constantly thrown out there. I don't understand it at all. The results of the Bruseles fight are pretty much completely irrelevant as far as attempting to draw conclusions to a Mayweather-Cotto fight. Cotto and Bruseles are friends, Puerto Rican, and were at one time both trained by Evangelista....comparisons end there. Cotto is by far superior to Bruseles, and Gatti too for that matter.

[Check]

Why not watch his fights and look?

Castillo in 2002 and Castillo in 2004 are the same fighter.



Sheer ******ity.

You actually are going to claim that Ray Leonard wasn't in his prime in 1980? Seriously?

When will you people realise that the way he fought Duran in the second fight was not how Leonard usually fought before and after that fight?

Ray Leonard was absolutely in his prime in 1980. The Welterweight Champion with a stoppage victory over an ATG in Wilfred Benitez.

Saying Duran, a Lightweight, moving up to Welterweight to beat one of the greatest Welterweight's in the history of the sport is "Not that special" then you need to re-analyse things.

You're entitled to your opinion but I disagree with the whole thought process of gaining a good win. In the Duran fight I don't consider it great because Leonard fought a bad fight. Okay, maybe he was in his prime, maybe it was his typical style, but he didn't fight the smart fight. Props for Duran being able to exploit that but had Leonard fought a smart fight, Duran would never have won. Sure, his resume does say he beat Leonard but it's only because Leonard didn't do the right thing in the ring. When you have to rely on your opponent ***ing up, that's not you doing it, that's him doing it for you.

[IronDanHamza]

You're entitled to your opinion but I disagree with the whole thought process of gaining a good win. In the Duran fight I don't consider it great because Leonard fought a bad fight. Okay, maybe he was in his prime, maybe it was his typical style, but he didn't fight the smart fight. Props for Duran being able to exploit that but had Leonard fought a smart fight, Duran would never have won. Sure, his resume does say he beat Leonard but it's only because Leonard didn't do the right thing in the ring. When you have to rely on your opponent ***ing up, that's not you doing it, that's him doing it for you.

Leonard fought how he fought for 95% of his career in the first Duran fight.

He didn't 'rely' in his opponent ****ing up they both came to fight like they normally did and Duran got the better of him.