Cotto's mistake he fought 2 slick fighters in a row...
Collapse
-
Don't get me wrong, I agree the Margarito fight took a lot out of him and he is past prime but at the same time imo he is still fairly good. I'd still pick him to beat Canelo although I understand why others disagree.Maybe, maybe not. I remember when watching the Margarito fight thinking that he wouldnt quite be the same afterwards, its a short career for a boxer. Cotto is a very good fighter and is still relatively handy, but I dont think he is anywhere near as fresh or as sharp as he was.
yeah, grew up watching those guysOn another note...great sig pic!Comment
-
It was more than Trout being slick. Trout had a very noticeable reach / size advantage on Cotto and he exploited it on top of being a very good boxer. Cotto has fought well against speed fighters, but all speed fighters aren't slick boxers by definition. Mosley and Judah are what I'd call speed fighters before calling them "slick".Comment
-
I suppose he should have fought just one slick fighter in a row......???what Roach is probably saying is after losing to a slick fighter like Floyd, Cotto should of taken an opponent he could hit, instead of taking on another slick guy right away...
Cotto only wants to fight the best though, and in certain parts of the fight it was almost like he wanted to show that he was slicker than Trout.Comment
-
Larry these guys don't get it. Cotto fought Trout to try and regain a belt AND test himself. I think its a good thing, even though he lost. He's doing the right thing by passing that torch, planned or not.
I wish more top fighters let underdogs and unknowns grow in the sport.
Trout is on everyone's mind now, we all want to see him against the best. Good on Cotto for letting him shine.Comment
Comment