Canelo already said he won't fight him. Said he was focused on two fighters, Mayweather and Cotto. Plus let's be real here, Trout is a legit junior middle weight, Canelo doesn't want any of that
he will because there won't be anyother road to take, well see what happens, Canelo needs to fight somebody already!
He had a much easier time when he made Trout chase. I'm surprised he didn't stick with that strategy after that one round he had where he kept nailing Trout coming in. Maybe Cotto didn't have the stamina to keep it up, ?Trout was nailing his body all night.
His stamina in the Margs rematch was amazing, so we know he can do it... he just didnt seem prepared for "this" kind of fight, IMO.
Exactly! We are trying to talk about Trout's future in the sport after this big win and all these guys can talk about is Mayweather? Ridiculous. You can't compare Floyd/Cotto to Cotto/Trout because there are too many aspects to them fights. Only thing that is similar is Floyd shut Cotto out on the cards and so did Trout. How did Trout make Floyd look exposed?
I'm not even interested in a Floyd-Trout so there is really no sense in mentioning , Floyd is a welterweight at the end of the day, period. The real question is where does Trout go from here? only logical options are Canelo, Lara vs Vanes winner? Angulo? Kirkland?
wow trout beat cotto decisively and cotto gave mayweather all he could handle
what does that say about mayweather?
good for trout tho, good kid
look at the magnitude of the fights man, with mayweather he was facing the best in the business so he trained like hell, he only picked trout because he turned down pacquiao's catchweight offer for a rematch, motivation always plays a role, thats like u fightin bruce lee and then u gotta fight the little chinese guy from hangover. trout did his thing though but this fight doesnt say nothing about mayweather , dont even think for a second trout can beat him
I don't know what fight you people we're watching and I have no clue why people are shocked. I had Trout a serious contender to win this fight as soon as it was announced. Trout delivered and won this fight decisively....but what beating are you people talking about??????? Jacobs to Fitzpatrick was a beating. Velez to Sanchez was a beating. Cotto and Trout was just a good competitive fight. Trout never in this fight put his foot on the petal and decided to put the beats on Cotto like he could've so I don't know what the hell you guy's we're watching. The scores we're ridiculous. I gave Cotto 3 or 4 rounds, though I need to watch it a second time. And in regards to the Mayweather comparisons you people are bound to bring up, I honestly think Mayweather/Cotto was a better fight, and I believe Mayweather did a better job than Trout as far as establishing who the better fighter was. I thought Cotto won 2 rounds against Floyd.
I'm not even interested in a Floyd-Trout so there is really no sense in mentioning , Floyd is a welterweight at the end of the day, period. The real question is where does Trout go from here? only logical options are Canelo, Lara vs Vanes winner? Angulo? Kirkland?
No question Trout won, but I don't know about that judge who only gave Cotto 1 round. That said, I think tonight we saw that Trout is a very serious threat to anybody at 154. I had seen Trout fight about 2 or 3 times before tonight and I felt he was kind of boring and didn't have enough to be in there with the big boys, but he proved otherwise tonight. Cong**** to Austin Trout, very well deserved win.
I gave Cotto 3 or 4 rounds, though I need to watch it a second time. And in regards to the Mayweather comparisons you people are bound to bring up, I honestly think Mayweather/Cotto was a better fight, and I believe Mayweather did a better job than Trout as far as establishing who the better fighter was. I thought Cotto won 2 rounds against Floyd.
I had Trout winning eight rounds as well...He fought a great fight, using his punch to the body effectively and scoring well with the uppercuts. Austin also did not let Cotto dig in to the body in close quarters that often.
Comment