QUOTE(Fitz @ Apr 14 2008, 08:06 AM) [snapback]386173[/snapback]
Early in Cotto's career when he was still green. He was beating solid (not great) fighters like N'Dou and Corley. Then he has beaten fighters like Malignagi, Quintana (I know boxing maths isn't great, but you get the link here), Judah and Mosley. While Margarito's most notable recent performances have been a fight he looked bad against Clottey and losing against Williams. Then there is his win last night against Cintron. Which was pretty obvious and did what was expected. Cotto is still undefeated. To me I find it harder based on those facts alone to consider Margarito any better than Cotto. Margarito's best win in his career probably isn't any better than Cotto's three best wins and Cotto is just coming on now.
Alot of that is based on opportunity. I think recently margarito has taken the bigger risks. When no one would fight Williams and Clottey, he did. For the record, I think Cotto loses to both of those guys. With, say Judah and Mosley, you kinda know what you're getting. 2 years ago, Tony Margarito was in a similar position to Clottey/Williams. The Judah's, Mosleys and Mayweathers would make up excuses not to fight him. Dont get me wrong, i know economics has alot to do with it, but everyone knows that if they fight Margarito, Williams and Clottey they will be in the fight of their life.
QUOTE(Fitz @ Apr 14 2008, 08:06 AM) [snapback]386173[/snapback]
I am only going by resume here. If I want to go with skill as well, Cotto is better than Margarito in just about every category. He has better defense, he is a technically better boxer, he is a better puncher, he is much quicker and moves around the ring a lot more comfortably. Margarito is bigger/stronger, better chin and stamina.
I think Cotto is more athletic and more conventional than Margarito. While Cotto has more athletic gifts, Margarito has more intangibles.
QUOTE(Fitz @ Apr 14 2008, 08:06 AM) [snapback]386173[/snapback]
Also it is quite easy to say that Cotto is a better fighter than Margarito if he loses. Just like I can say that Jones is better than Tarver, Harris is better than Maussa, Tyson is better than Douglas, Mosley is better than Forrest, Forrest is better than Mayorga and Hearns is better than Barkley.
I actually agree with the rest of your post and you state the very reasons I think Margarito may be wrong for Cotto and could win. But like I said, that really doesn't equate to me thinking that Margarito is better than Cotto. Just on everything I have seen, Cotto is the much better fighter, I'm just not sure he will mesh well with Margarito in the ring.
It looks as though you are talking career/legacy vs individual matchups. Each one of those matchups above, you could say Fighter A had a much better career than Fighter B. Much of that is based on opportunity and exposure. I dont think that speaks to the actual meshing of the styles on fight nite.
QUOTE(Fitz @ Apr 14 2008, 08:06 AM) [snapback]386173[/snapback]
I think we are on the same page regarding the fight and how Margarito can maybe win. I just don't think it equates to Margarito being just as good or a better fighter than Cotto. So far Cotto has a better resume to me and seems to beat Margarito in most skill areas. I think that's where we differ.
I think the head to head matchup is the best way to tell who is superior. The 2nd way would be how they fared against several common opponents. I dont think they have any. I agree that Cotto appears to have a very slight edge in resume too. Its my belief that if Cotto is the better fighter, he should win. They are both prime vs prime.