If his résumé and skills are better, he's the greater fighter. Unless there's some other definition for it I don't know of. Cotto has better wins and acting like Vitali is more skilled than him is garbage. They are very close in that area with strong cases being made for both, more often for Cotto according to the poll.
Who's greater, Miguel Cotto or Vitali Klitschko?
Collapse
-
The question is whether Cotto is the type of fighter that would beat Vitali, theoretically speaking. He has the skills yes, and the heart, but his chin is too suspect. Vitali goes toe to toe with his opponents, has heart and an iron chin.
Cotto loses because of a weaker chin.Comment
-
Again, that isn't what the poll is asking. You can't blame Vitali for fighting in a weak era, but it's not like we can up his résumé with what ifs because we think he'd beat people. We can only judge on what we've seen and what opponents we've seen it against.Comment
-
Cotto is such a bad boxer its unreal, I guess its his "look" that makes you guys like him. Watching him vs Floyd was such a terrible fight yet all you people thought it was such a great effort.. haha morons.Comment
-
at least gave a flying fuck about him, even though it was only for a night.
Comment
-
Cotto has the better resume, but Vitali's dominance and his succesful comeback after 4 years make him the greater fighter.
Plus he's never been beaten up so badly as Cotto by Margarito - (Who was an average fighter, at best), sure Vitali lost 2 fights but he was ahead on points in both of them and was never dominated and humilated like Cotto.Comment
-
Cotto has the better resume, but Vitali's dominance and his succesful comeback after 4 years make him the greater fighter.
Plus he's never been beaten up so badly as Cotto by Margarito - (Who was an average fighter, at best), sure Vitali lost 2 fights but he was ahead on points in both of them and was never dominated and humilated like Cotto.Comment
Comment