FIGHT OF THE YEAR- 2007???

All that, yet U're STILL tooo COWARDLY to Wager AGAINST Floyd...


REED:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

 

pretty much. It was a very good fight for boxing fans, much like Calzaghe-Kessler last week (which I would argue was as good, if not better, than last night's fight).

 

Here's a question...

Who is fighter of the year?

The top three should be:

Cotto
Juan Diaz
Kelly Pavlik

No matter what Floyd does against Hatton, any of those three have a more legit claim than he does.

Thoughts?

 

I'd still probably have it between Pavlik and Floyd, with an edge towards the latter if he manages to take out Hatton...Cotto had a hard time with Judah and arguably drew last night-not to take away from him, he's very good, but not this year...

 

Diaz has had an IMPRESSIVE Year, but he has No REALISTIC Shot:nono: ...Freitas & Julio Diaz just AREN'T "Fighter of the Year" Caliber Wins...

If Floyd Beats Hatton IMPRESSIVELY, he's the "Fighter of the Year" in REED's Opinion...He Will have Won in the Biggest EVENT of 2007 & then Beaten Another "Fighter of the Year" CANDIDATE in Hatton (Can't Leave him OUT of the Arguement)...

Pavlik will B the POPULAR Choice, but in Hindsight, How "Big" were the Zertuche & Miranda Wins???:dunno: ...Sure, they were Important N the DEVELOPMENT of Pavlik, but R they "Fighter of they Year" Caliber Wins???...

Cotto was VERY Impressive vs. Zab & MILDLY Impressive Last Night...Again, if Floyd is VERY Impressive vs. Hatton HE's the "Fighter of the Year" in REED's opinion...



REED

 

Beating Ricky, one way or the other, unless he fucking shoots him, will be impressive enuff, and good enuff to make Floyd FOTY. Way to pick a time to talk Floyds opposition down.:laughing:

 

Yeah you would say that.

But it's ridiculous. If Floyd beats Hatton..he would have beaten both hatton and De La Hoya in the same year: got his 5th weight division title and been the first man to defeat Ricky Hatton...the TRUE Jnr Welterweight champion.

He would have it on lock down.

 

I'd pick Bika and Codrington.

Seemed to me they were hurting each other over and over again, back and forth, constantly.

And $750K was on the line...not sure what the loser was getting, but the way I thought about it was that it was almost a winner take all scenario (with the loser getting something but not anything near 3/4 of a million dollars.)

So to me the fact that it looked like either guy could go at any time and the fact that the lions share of the purse was going to the winner was what made it fight of the year for me.

 

Cotto's victory over Shane was a razor thin one as you know with elements of bitch ie- running, and his win over Urkal was not impressive frankly, neither was his struggle over a twice beaten Judah, a fight that should never have happenned at all.

Pavlik or Diaz surpass him comfortably.

 

That wasn't better. Cotto-Mosley was an incredible fight.

 

DELUDED. Dang you are simple and shot.

Kessler-Calzaghe was a pure classic, right up to the last few seconds.

 

For about half the fight, I would agree with you.

Williams-Margarito was better.

 

In terms of being the best pure 'boxing match', I'd pick the Calzaghe-Kessler fight, but IMO Vasquez-Marquez II was FOTY.

If Mayweather beats Hatton on Dec 8th, then he is an absolute certainty for 'Fighter of the Year', and rightly so (and I am no PBF fan.).

MTF

 

I think Bika-Codrington will suffer the same fate as Gibbs-Edouard, it will be overlooked because of its relative importance. IMO, Taylor Pavlik of Kessler Calzaghe will get it. As for the Fighter of the year award, I think the winner of Mayweather Hatton will get it.

 

Bika-codrington was far far better than Cas-Kessler. Caz-Kessler was a good decent fight but far, far from a foty type of fight, you guys are nuts.

 

:cheer: :cheer:

agREED...


REED:clap:

 

REED, who is that in your avatar?

 

vargas


















supposedly

 

ITV4 have just shown the Bika - Codrington 'Contender' bout...

:eeeek: :bears:

I may change my pick...

MTF

 

http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=42088&cat=boxer

lets rock!!!

 

No it wasn't. It was a good fight, but it wasn't even great, and it damn sure didn't live up to expectations. I'd say at best, it's somewhere in the Top 10 of the year's best fights, though if I thought on it long enough, I could come up with ten better.

I'm not even sure I'd argue that it was the best Cotto fight of the year. Cotto-Zab was more one-sided, but based on action and atmosphere, it blew away last night's fight.

 

The way Cotto-Mosley is being depicted is just ridiculous.

First off, Mosley got on his toes and avoided contact trying to stay on the outside and land his right hand...and took a round or two on the cards doing that.

It's hailed as a good adjustment and a very smart move - which I think it was.

Yet when Cotto takes the role of boxer and does the same - winning 2 of the last 4 with the 12th being arguable - it's now being called a "bitch" move, "running," etc.

When Mayweather does it because he is fighting a bigger, stronger guy in DLH...it's the smart thing to do.

Does anyone else see the hypocrisy?

And he was more effective at it than Mosley was at boxing outside. Cotto made Mosley have to come to him, then defended, blocked, slipped and hit Mosley CLEAN off the ropes with combinations and counter shots.

Why does Cotto HAVE to ALWAYS play the role of aggressor to get any credit....when he's shown in the past he can box quite well and showed it again last night?

I don't get it. Who cares WHY he did it - he was effective either way.

This was not Trinidad-DLH, and any attempt to depict it as such should be thrown out on its head. Cotto was generating significant, hard offense.

Second point in regards to FOTY: personally (very personally), I prefer my FOTY-level fights to have a mix of significance, drama, skill, and competitiveness.

I loved Bika-Codrington - and I loved Ward-Gatti I - for what they were and what they gave us.

But to me, Pavlik-Taylor, Vazquez-Marquez II and Calzaghe-Kessler were superior fights.

ANd Cotto-Mosley is being underrated....the way both fighters fought to their strengths, then had their strengths taken away from them by the other fighter and had to adjust and re-adjust....that was great boxing.

Those fights MEAN more and they are more about what TRUE boxing ("the sweet science") is all about.

Why shouldn't an FOTY be about what purists or hardcore boxing fans should be looking for? Who ELSE is the award for and about?

It's not like the mainstream media reports on the FOTY. ::

Peace.

 

Seriously what made this fight a classic? Please provide me with some details. I'll Holla 5000

 

Me explaining the fundamentals of classic thinking boxing/punching to you is like Einstein wasting his time explaining physics to me. You don't follow boxing bigdawg.

 

Barrera-Marquez was my favourite

 

As far as the differences between Shane and Cotto doing what they did:
- the way I saw it, Shane was getting handled on the inside, with Cotto putting more and more distance between the two on the cards with each passing round. Shane changed up, and was able to win some rounds to the point where he could go back to trying to beat Cotto at his own game, which in effect...
- caused Cotto to box, not in an attempt to win rounds, but because (and by his own admission) he believed to be up on the cards and figured he could afford to coast a bit. Why? Because he got hurt. Also, he won 2 of the last 4 on your scorecard, which represents a minority opinion. And there was nothing debatable about the 12th. Again, by his own admission, Cotto all but gave the round away, believing he had the fight in the bag (which he did).

As for the fight itself - it was good, possibly very good. I said it somewhere else, maybe even in this thread. It was a very good fight for boxing fans, but not exactly the type of fight that reinvents the wheel. Not sure what more you're looking from people in terms of praise. There's no way it lived up to expectations - it or the card as a whole, which featured the worst undercard for a major show in quite some time.

To me, Saturday's fight was a better version of Cotto-N'Dou, but a lesser version of Mosley-DLH I. It was a good fight, probably one I'll watch again next week. But one that will be forgotten by the time 2007 becomes 2008. IMO, anyway.

 

I thought it was an entertaining, intriguing battle, where one guy wouldn't and the other guy couldn't. But it was never a FOTY, ever. It kept you guessing and it kept you watching, but if that was the litmus then Wlad-Brewster II was FOTY as well.

 

Fair.

Also - that's what Cotto said, but I don't always believe everything fighters say (and neither do you).

I do think he boxed because he saw he wasn't going to stop Shane and/or make him wilt - but I do think it was also an adjustment to Mosley turning up the heat again in the 8th and 9th and hurting Cotto to the body.

So - it was an adjustment by Cotto as well, in that sense.

As far as scorecards....I broke the 9th down by time (something I rarely do), and I have a really hard time understanding why people think that is a clear Mosley round. It's in the r-by-r thread...let me know your opinion when/if you rewatch.

The 12th is debatable in the sense that though Cotto was backing off and Mosley was pursuing, neither man landed anything of consequence...but if I remember correctly, the cleanest punches were Cotto jabs.

I really detest how Cotto chose to fight in the 12th, btw.

I'm not looking for any more "praise" for anyone on this fight....I just disagree with how some depict it. I thought it was a very good bout.

Peace.

 

I kinda take back what I said about the 12th, only because I'm reading more and more people from ringside scoring it for Cotto. Not always the best indicator, mind you, but my apologies for being closed-minded on it.

I agree on that what Cotto did late was smart boxing. But he's going to catch more flak for it - whether or not he deserves it is another story - because Shane adjusted in order to remain competitve and possibly win. Cotto adjusted in order to preserve a lead.

When the sales pitch is, Cotto never takes a step backward, all-action fighter, etc., then ends the fight the way he does - people will have something to say about. Again, I don't necessarily think Cotto deserves that much flak for it. But perception being reality in the minds of most, the reaction was expected.

 

1. Pavlik-Taylor
2. Marquez - Vazquez 1
3. Calzaghe - Kessler
4. Marquez - Vazquez 2

After that, in no order
Mormeck - Bell 2
Katsidis - Earl
Abraham - Gevor
Sylvester - Asikainen 2

Pavlik - Taylor stands out IMO for drama and significance, although Kessler-Calzaghe was of a higher quality