People actually thought Cotto won dont know how to score fights
Collapse
-
Meh, you've a really bad scoring system and what you define as clear effective shots, you'll not find a video of Cotto landing clean hard shots in the centre of the ring, you'll see him throw 10 and land 2 jabs against the ropes though, and if that does it for you, that's fine..I'm not saying Mayweather didn't win the fight, I'm just saying it was a lot closer than people thought. I watched it on Boxnation, and as of the end of the second round, the commentators had concluded that Cotto didn't really stand a chance. They proceeded to spend the next 10 rounds talking about how amazing Mayweather was, sometimes talking about how great he was at the same time as Cotto was landing on Mayweather, neglecting to mention that he'd just been hit. I scored it 117-114 for Floyd when I watched it live, then I watched it today with the volume down and had it 116-115 Mayweather. The better man won on the night, but it was a close fight.Comment
-
I gave Cotto three rounds. I thought he fought competitively and made a great account of himself but he clearly lost.
I think a few too many people gave Cotto rounds that he made a good account of himself, but didn't actually win. You can't score a round for Cotto because he did better than you thought he was going to, he has to actually win the round. He rarely did that.Comment
-
Like 5 people on this whole forum thought Cotto won and they are more than likely trolling, yet everyone is focusing on them.
Move on guysComment
-
1) A lot of the fight took place on the ropes.Meh, you've a really bad scoring system and what you define as clear effective shots, you'll not find a video of Cotto landing clean hard shots in the centre of the ring, you'll see him throw 10 and land 2 jabs against the ropes though, and if that does it for you, that's fine..
2) Cotto's jab was quite effective in the middle of the ring.
3) Mayweather won the fight, but Cotto should've been given quite a lot more than he was on the scorecards.
That is all.Comment
-
It really wasn't. Floyd landed the harder blows and the cleaner punches, displayed excellent defense, controlled the ring and the exchanges and landed at a higher percentage.I'm not saying Mayweather didn't win the fight, I'm just saying it was a lot closer than people thought. I watched it on Boxnation, and as of the end of the second round, the commentators had concluded that Cotto didn't really stand a chance. They proceeded to spend the next 10 rounds talking about how amazing Mayweather was, sometimes talking about how great he was at the same time as Cotto was landing on Mayweather, neglecting to mention that he'd just been hit. I scored it 117-114 for Floyd when I watched it live, then I watched it today with the volume down and had it 116-115 Mayweather. The better man won on the night, but it was a close fight.
With the exception of the straight left hand, Cotto didn't find success with any other punches. Just because he made a better account of himself that people thought he would, the reality is that this was a competitive fight, but not a close one.Comment
-
Cotto looked like he had it his way from the telecast, but yeah Floyd was either rolling them punches or Cotto did not connect properly (half his fist tapped Floyd in some shots, that would have affected the judge's impressions)Comment
-
Floyd strafed Cotto with right hands all night, outlanded him on the ropes, and hurt him.
Im just thankful that you are not a judge. 117-114, 116-115? hahaha what the **** were you watching dude?Comment
-
You're entitled to your opinion, but I think that the scorecards were a horrible misrepresentation of what happened in the ring. Maybe you'd think differently if you didn't listen to HBO or Boxnation blow smoke up Floyd's ass for 12 rounds.Comment

Comment