Khan Calls out Cotto at 155 for MW Title at 155!!...

First topic message reminder :

I'll love for someone to make a case for Khan

Boy has gone full Ret*rd-

Khan v @RealMiguelCotto I'd take that fight in a heartbeat at catch weight 155lbs for the @WBCBoxing Middleweight title

Stylistically cotto would be a great fight for me. He's a great champion. Just imagine that fight in UK.

Secondly what kind of disgraceful fight would this be if any fight happens for the MW title at 155!!! especially between a WW/small JMW vs a new WW.

You have to remember Milky that in the old days Boxers didn't fight to feed their families...But for honor and the glory of the sport .

ShahenshahG wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:He loves Leonard the smarmy Kumquat.

You calling me a smarmy kumquat?

Ha. Possibly and probably but initially it was aimed at Leonard. Though I do note your plea for attention and accuse you of being a pompous Tinkywinky

I've been called worse. Most days.

Amazing how we've ended up on Mayweather and Hagler again..

Shame on the hijacker...

On the plus side, no-one's mentioned Louis yet. Oh, sorry.

Couldn't think of a way to get him in.......

Give it time..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Amazing how we've ended up on Mayweather and Hagler again..

FMJ would've danced around Hagler to a 120-108 sort of UD, possibly 120-105 if Floyd were to land those thunderous murdersome right hands of his.fre

But anyway....

Shame Hagler didn't afford those above him the same freebie SRL/Hearn gave him by moving up to face him. Beat up on the little guys!

Ok...

Back to the topic:

Cotto is now looking for an opponent that DOES NOT include Mayweather, Pacquiao or Alvarez.

Any chance he fights Golovkin?

Ok. Tim Bradley it is......

Bradley Pryce, who is dead to me as you may know, is lacing up his gloves as we speak

DAVE667 wrote:Bradley Pryce, who is dead to me as you may know, is lacing up his gloves as we speak

Bradley Pryce? Isn't he smaller? Why isn't he looking to fight Adonis Stevenson? Cherry picking b**tard....

Bradley is a "have gloves, will travel (and put weight on/take weight off)" kind of warrior and prepared to put it all on the line for the cause (although clearly not prepared to give me an ounce of credit for keeping his name at the forefront of world boxing on these hallowed pages, the dirty, ignorant, selfish, backstabbing c*nt!)

DAVE667 wrote:Bradley is a "have gloves, will travel (and put weight on/take weight off)" kind of warrior and prepared to put it all on the line for the cause (although clearly not prepared to give me an ounce of credit for keeping his name at the forefront of world boxing on these hallowed pages, the dirty, ignorant, selfish, backstabbing c*nt!)

Where exactly does Floyd come into this Cotto-Pryce debate? Can you insert him please as I'm confused?

Cotto is actually a joke as a MW. He holds a belt at 160 and these are/were his options/rumoured opponents:

Canelo @155 - only decent rumour so far and he botched it
Mayweather 2 @154.5 - natural welter
Bradley @ 155 - small welter
Rios @ 154 - fat limited lightweight
And no khan @ 155 - two fights at welter, spanked at 140

Is this a joke? Like why hasn't a single natural middlewight been suggested?

Boxers are businessmen and it's frustrating for the fans...........

If any of us had a desirable commodity in the shape of a nice ABC belt we'd want to get set for life........

Which would mean picking the right option (If you could) for the best price......

Name fighters come at a premium these days hence they can get away with picking and choosing..........

It's not a good time for the fan but it would be folly to presume had these oldtimers with "Names" been around these days...they would do anything differently..

Boxing has changed and not for the better.........

hazharrison wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Bradley is a "have gloves, will travel (and put weight on/take weight off)" kind of warrior and prepared to put it all on the line for the cause (although clearly not prepared to give me an ounce of credit for keeping his name at the forefront of world boxing on these hallowed pages, the dirty, ignorant, selfish, backstabbing c*nt!)

Where exactly does Floyd come into this Cotto-Pryce debate? Can you insert him please as I'm confused?

Once Pryce KO's Cotto, Floyd will announce that Bradley is the most dangerous opponent he could find and will pull out all the stops to "make it happen" but I predict talks will stall over Bradley's demands for a year's supply of Dolly Mixtures

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:Cotto is actually a joke as a MW. He holds a belt at 160 and these are/were his options/rumoured opponents:

Canelo @155 - only decent rumour so far and he botched it
Mayweather 2 @154.5 - natural welter
Bradley @ 155 - small welter
Rios @ 154 - fat limited lightweight
And no khan @ 155 - two fights at welter, spanked at 140

Is this a joke? Like why hasn't a single natural middlewight been suggested?

Probably end up fighting sam soliman - cotto loves to them cripples

I wish the welters were brave like undisputed Honey was back in the 80s...

Bumphus................ 140 pounder..........
Hatcher...................140 pounder
Vaca.......................Mexican roadsweeper...
Blocker....................Journeyman...........

Starling and Breland never got a look in..............Fancy that................

We probably shouldn't be too hard on Cotto yet - the guy's never ducked a fight in his career. But yeah, the sport lacks any semblance of governance - the ABCs should be laughing at the suggestion of some of those fighters but they only care about the sanctioning fees: the bigger the purse, the bigger their cut.

Some fighters still look to cut through the nonsense. Hopkins consistently tested himself - don't think there's anyone else in the last 15 years who's faced as many fighters considered the divisional boss.

Cotto's first defence isn't it..............allowed a voluntary

It's all voluntary these days - the ABC s would only push a mandatory if they felt they'd be better off financially. When did Floyd last face a mandatory? I'm sure he's probably still affiliated with some ABC or another?

hazharrison wrote:We probably shouldn't be too hard on Cotto yet - the guy's never ducked a fight in his career. But yeah, the sport lacks any semblance of governance - the ABCs should be laughing at the suggestion of some of those fighters but they only care about the sanctioning fees: the bigger the purse, the bigger their cut.

Some fighters still look to cut through the nonsense. Hopkins consistently tested himself - don't think there's anyone else in the last 15 years who's faced as many fighters considered the divisional boss.

 

Didn't fight Lara, Canelo, Williams...

He fought Manny and Mayweather arguably the two best fighters of the era....

Give him a break.

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:We probably shouldn't be too hard on Cotto yet - the guy's never ducked a fight in his career. But yeah, the sport lacks any semblance of governance - the ABCs should be laughing at the suggestion of some of those fighters but they only care about the sanctioning fees: the bigger the purse, the bigger their cut.

Some fighters still look to cut through the nonsense. Hopkins consistently tested himself - don't think there's anyone else in the last 15 years who's faced as many fighters considered the divisional boss.

 

Didn't fight Lara, Canelo, Williams...

Bit harsh throwing Alvarez and Lara at a guy who fought Mosley and Margarito when they were still top welterweights, a red hot Pacquiao and Floyd at 154. The Canelo fight might still come off depending on Little Lord Fauntleroy's next move.

To be fair Cotto took on Pacquaio and got cut in half not too long after suffering a damaging loss against a tooled up Margarito. I don't doubt his willingness to step in the ring with anyone, he just seems to want things on his terms and for a fair whack of money.

I class Floyd the same. I've never felt he fancied the Pacquaio fight mainly due to the fact he's a control freak who can't fathom that he may have to accommodate his opponent on some issues.

KO-KING wrote:

hazharrison wrote:We probably shouldn't be too hard on Cotto yet - the guy's never ducked a fight in his career. But yeah, the sport lacks any semblance of governance - the ABCs should be laughing at the suggestion of some of those fighters but they only care about the sanctioning fees: the bigger the purse, the bigger their cut.

Some fighters still look to cut through the nonsense. Hopkins consistently tested himself - don't think there's anyone else in the last 15 years who's faced as many fighters considered the divisional boss.

 

Didn't fight Lara, Canelo, Williams...

Didn't fight Hatton either.

milkyboy wrote:On the plus side, no-one's mentioned Louis yet. Oh, sorry.

Louis was a ducker. If he'd had any real ambition he would have accepted catchweight fights against Conn and John Henry Lewis who were both light heavies. Louis stayed in his comfort zone waiting for smaller fighters to move up and come to him.

... Good points... And he couldn't  even be bothered to fight his mandatories twice. F**king pu$$¥.

Haglers opposition is being underrated. Fighters like Hamsho and Minter were good fighters. This was before the all the hoopla where there is a title going for almost every fight and practically every boxer is being marketed as some kind of world champion or multi weight this and pound for pound that.

catchweight wrote:Haglers opposition is being underrated. Fighters like Hamsho and Minter were good fighters. This was before the all the hoopla where there is a title going for almost every fight and practically every boxer is being marketed as some kind of world champion or multi weight this and pound for pound that.

This is 606v2. The parallel universe.

catchweight wrote:Haglers opposition is being underrated. Fighters like Hamsho and Minter were good fighters. This was before the all the hoopla where there is a title going for almost every fight and practically every boxer is being marketed as some kind of world champion or multi weight this and pound for pound that.

Hamsho wasn't a good looking fighter with flashy skills, but he was a decent fighter, I would have liked to have seen a Hamsho v Sibson fight. If there were four belts available back then like there is now and Hagler held two of them, I pick Hamsho to win one of the other two.

Nowadays Hamsho would have 2/3 divisions he could pick from with up to ten or fifteen titles up for grabs.

Back then, he had Hagler.

catchweight wrote:Nowadays Hamsho would have 2/3 divisions he could pick from with up to ten or fifteen titles up for grabs.

Back then, he had Hagler.

Yes I agree, and that's the shame of boxing nowadays, some of the stars of today would have been just contenders just a few years ago. I'm not sure that Cotto would have been a champ in the 80's either, but today, he's a four weight champ.

Sibson was a good fighter - he'd have picked up an alphabet or two these days also.

Before we get all nostalgic, and no/one gets more nostalgic about the 80's than me, we started off with two belts and ended up with three by the middle of it. People bitched about protected champions then and how the best often didnt fight. Arguello Serrano, Sanchez pedrosa, mcguigan nelson etc etc. obviously the middle division was unified but the issues in boxing were still there. Clearly they have got worse since.

Minter was an under-rated fighter, better than his record which was littered by his cuts defeats. He got caught up in the emotion of a supercharged arena against hagler and fought like an idiot. That's what the hagler team thought who'd been expecting a tough night. Hagler a level above anyway of course and Minter was probably at the tail end of prime when he won the title, probably peaked towards the end of the finnegan trilogy though looked good against vito. Finnegan himself gave hagler as much trouble as anyone.

Hamsho was a Syrian antuofermo... a game slugger. What did his manager say? 'Style? He has no style'. He was just tough as boots and game as they come and very fit. He was certainly no worse, and maybe better than antuofermo who managed to win the title. Hamsho did benefit from timing... He ate minter's jab all night when they fought but the Vegas judges prefer the bull to the matador.  'I can't score with the jab in Vegas' as minter said. He got light heavy/cruiser and equally limited bobby Czyz as a young middleweight, and those of you who've seen the benitez fight will understand what he beat that night, whether you believe that benitez just couldn't cope with a rough middleweight, or whether you witnessed the first day of the instant decline of a once sublime talent is your own call but if you watch the fight, he was terrible. The fact Hamsho was able to be back as no 1 contender was more indicative of the state of the division than how good he was. He was awkward, persistent and brought constant pressure, which was enough to deal with the mediocrity of the day, but he lost every minute of every round against hagler, and would have been well beaten by any half decent champion... just my opinion of course!

Along with obelmejias whose elevation to number 1 contender was all politics, caveman lee a very overmatched stand-in, scypion who couldn't find the floor quick enough, I'm afraid it just wasn't the greatest of eras for middleweights. Sibson was a decent fighter, roldan was genuinely awkward and a bit better than some credit him with.

Are these guys good enough to pick up a belt now, of course they are if barker, geale etc can... but that hardly makes them elite. No-one thought so at the time and the hagler team were pretty dismissive of the capabilites of a few of them. Hagler did what a good champion should and battered them, but lets not make them out to be something they're not.

Not often mentioned but a shame in retrospect that ayub kalue opted to campaign at light middle. He started off at middle and ended up there, beating a host of good fighters along the way, but took a title shot at light middle and stayed there til leonard beat him. You can question his durability at the very highest level, but at a more comfortable weight for him, excepting the fab three, he would probably have been the best challenge out there for hagler in the early 80's.

milkyboy wrote:Before we get all nostalgic, and no/one gets more nostalgic about the 80's than me, we started off with two belts and ended up with three by the middle of it. People bitched about protected champions then and how the best often didnt fight. Arguello Serrano, Sanchez pedrosa, mcguigan nelson etc etc. obviously the middle division was unified but the issues in boxing were still there. Clearly they have got worse since.

Minter was an under-rated fighter, better than his record which was littered by his cuts defeats. He got caught up in the emotion of a supercharged arena against hagler and fought like an idiot. That's what the hagler team thought who'd been expecting a tough night. Hagler a level above anyway of course and Minter was probably at the tail end of prime when he won the title, probably peaked towards the end of the finnegan trilogy though looked good against vito. Finnegan himself gave hagler as much trouble as anyone.

Hamsho was a Syrian antuofermo... a game slugger. What did his manager say? 'Style? He has no style'. He was just tough as boots and game as they come and very fit. He was certainly no worse, and maybe better than antuofermo who managed to win the title. Hamsho did benefit from timing... He ate minter's jab all night when they fought but the Vegas judges prefer the bull to the matador.  'I can't score with the jab in Vegas' as minter said. He got light heavy/cruiser and equally limited bobby Czyz as a young middleweight, and those of you who've seen the benitez fight will understand what he beat that night, whether you believe that benitez just couldn't cope with a rough middleweight, or whether you witnessed the first day of the instant decline of a once sublime talent is your own call but if you watch the fight, he was terrible. The fact Hamsho was able to be back as no 1 contender was more indicative of the state of the division than how good he was. He was awkward, persistent and brought constant pressure, which was enough to deal with the mediocrity of the day, but he lost every minute of every round against hagler, and would have been well beaten by any half decent champion... just my opinion of course!

Along with obelmejias whose elevation to number 1 contender was all politics, caveman lee  a very overmatched stand-in, scypion who couldn't find the floor quick enough, I'm afraid it just wasn't the greatest of eras for middleweights. Sibson was a decent fighter, roldan was genuinely awkward and a bit better than some credit him with.

Are these guys good enough to pick up a belt now, of course they are if barker, geale etc can... but that hardly makes them elite. No-one thought so at the time and the hagler team were pretty dismissive of the capabilites of a few of them. Hagler did what a good champion should and battered them, but lets not make them out to be something they're not.

Not often mentioned but a shame in retrospect that ayub kalue opted to campaign at light middle. He started off at middle and ended up there, beating a host of good fighters along the way, but took a title shot at light middle and stayed there til leonard beat him. You can question his durability at the very highest level, but at a more comfortable weight for him, excepting the fab three, he would probably have been the best challenge out there for hagler in the early 80's.

I don't think anyone's making them out to be anything more than you are - are they?

Some are saying his opposition is under-rated, I'm agreeing on some and disagreeing on others, and providing some detail as to why I think that rather than making sweeping generalisations. Just attempting to give balance rather than fighting a particular corner... outrageous though that might seem.

On the whole, I'd say his opposition has been underrated on the thread but I don't think anyone's called them elite fighters or anything. He fought some tough opponents, some softies - part and parcel of taking on who you've been mandated to fight I guess.

Minter had Vito winning the Hagler fight..........Watched an old interview on youtube with him....

This is where I should say Minter was a world champion and an expert so he knows what he's talking about..

But alas can't say I agree with him.......Had it to Hagler but it wasn't a robbery.......Marvin's own fault again !!

What I remember about Minter-Hagler was the racial taunt and the fact Minter had an aversion to moving his head...........Still he did hurt Hagler in the 2nd and I loved the way he told him to "come on" right after.....Even If it was folly..........Certainly had bollox.

Minter didn't seem anything special...............Vito was a poor champion.

pat petronelli "i couldn't believe how minter was trying to force the fight, the damn fool"

fair assessment

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Minter had Vito winning the Hagler fight..........Watched an old interview on youtube with him....

This is where I should say Minter was a world champion and an expert so he knows what he's talking about..

But alas can't say I agree with him.......Had it to Hagler but it wasn't a robbery.......Marvin's own fault again !!

What I remember about Minter-Hagler was the racial taunt and the fact Minter had an aversion to moving his head...........Still he did hurt Hagler in the 2nd and I loved the way he told him to "come on" right after.....Even If it was folly..........Certainly had bollox.

Minter didn't seem anything special...............Vito was a poor champion.

I've never watched the fight from start to finish, so I can't give my scorecard, but thought you'd like another opinion on the verdict.

Sugar Ray Leonard wrote:Leonard: When I fought Wilfred Benitez — my first title fight — Hagler fought Antuofermo on the undercard. We watched it from the dressing room, and when the fight was over, we all said, “Hagler’s champion now.” And they called it a draw. I kind of felt a little empty for him, but I moved on very quickly because I was next. I knocked out Benitez in the 15th round and won the title, and my career started moving. I think, subconsciously, having seen Hagler get robbed, it hit home that I had to finish strong. I didn’t want to let it go to a decision.

Coming from the man who doesn't believe a word leonard says, i guess you'll assume it was a shut out for vito then

No milky, I never said I agreed with what Leonard said, just put it up as a different opinion to Minter's. I've only ever seen highlights of the Hagler Auto fight so I can't argue either way.

I'm sure though, now that you know Leonard thinks Hagler was robbed against Auto, you and Truss will have to find something else to bash Hagler with.  

... won't take us long to find something fella!

milkyboy wrote:Some are saying his opposition is under-rated, I'm agreeing on some and disagreeing on others, and providing some detail as to why I think that rather than making sweeping generalisations. Just attempting to give balance rather than fighting a particular corner... outrageous though that might seem.

The gist of thread was making out Haglers opposition to be much worse than it was.

Was it? I thought it was an age old debate that he was ok with smaller guys moving up to fight him, but wasn't offering the same to spinks/braxton... Questioning therefore whether he was legacy or dollar motivated and questioning whether fighting some club fighters at one weight division in a lengthy reign adds more to a legacy than weight hopping.

All valid points for debate with reasoned arguments that can be made on both sides in my opinion... to those with an open mind not out to shoe-horn everything to suit their positions on the state of current v past boxing.

SO harking back to the title of the thread, would anyone have a problem with Khan calling out Cotto at 155 if the belt wasn't on the line?

Apart from onetwo you mean? Probably not, they'd think he was a lunatic but otherwise ok with it.

milkyboy wrote:Was it? I thought it was an age old debate that he was ok with smaller guys moving up to fight him, but wasn't offering the same to spinks/braxton... Questioning therefore whether he was legacy or dollar motivated and questioning whether fighting some club fighters at one weight division in a lengthy reign adds more to a legacy than weight hopping.

All valid points for debate with reasoned arguments that can be made on both sides in my opinion... to those with an open mind not out to shoe-horn everything to suit their positions on the state of current v past boxing.

It was the repeated reference to the divisioning sucking that gave off that impression. The labeling of certain fighters in it as talentless. The indignation of fighting a talentless Hamsho TWICE. Or Obelmejias "types" or "poor" champions like Antuoermo. Certainly reading over the thread paints an unflattering portrayal of one of the best middlweights and middleweight reigns ever.

Oh dear the same guy who pees on Alvarez, Maidana, Hatton and all the rest of May's wins is popping at me for saying Hamsho, Vito, Lee and Oby are ordinary fighters..


1 Watch them fight before commenting.

2 You're a t*t.

Oh dear indeed. The spam folder is up to almost 30,000 posts.