[Tam-Tam]

Calzaghe ain't losing to a guy like Kelly Pavlik, bro.

[King Kabuki]

So what do you guys consider ring generalship?

And isnt coming forward relentlessly a skill? Hatton is a simple fighter but I was amazed at his footwork and relentless pressure on Mayweather. I think he comes forward better than Cotto but thats the only thing he does better than him.

Classically ring-generalship is the ability to use the entire ring for both offense and defense, and control of the pace of the fight. If a come-forward fighter mostly follows as opposed to cutting off, then he's not really the one in the lead even if he's winning the battle of hands.

I don't think Hatton comes forward that much better than Cotto necessarily, I think Cotto's slower of foot but he's got the better footwork of the two overall, as he showed against Abdullaev and Mosley, he can fight going backwards very well.

[SUGARSHANERULEZ]

Originally Posted by Tam-Tam

Calzaghe ain't losing to a guy like Kelly Pavlik, bro.

You seem quite sure of that, and I'm quite sure of the opposite. It's rare that my opinion of a possible fight is the polar opposite of yours, but I think Joe's ready to be taken, and Kellys the guy to do it. Weight is the sticking point here, and I'm not too sure that it'll happen.

[uppercuts21]

Originally Posted by King Kabuki

Classically ring-generalship is the ability to use the entire ring for both offense and defense, and control of the pace of the fight. If a come-forward fighter mostly follows as opposed to cutting off, then he's not really the one in the lead even if he's winning the battle of hands.

I don't think Hatton comes forward that much better than Cotto necessarily, I think Cotto's slower of foot but he's got the better footwork of the two overall, as he showed against Abdullaev and Mosley, he can fight going backwards very well.

How would you classify fighting going backwards?

Because in the later rounds of the Mosley fight, Cotto was losing rounds primarily because Mosley was dictating the fight. Cotto not Mosley was the one being backed down and having to fight off the ropes. With that said Cotto was better than I thought when going backwards but I think if a fighter can sustain that pressure throughout the fight, Cotto could be exploited. Would you agree?

[King Kabuki]

How would you classify fighting going backwards?

Because in the later rounds of the Mosley fight, Cotto was losing rounds primarily because Mosley was dictating the fight. Cotto not Mosley was the one being backed down and having to fight off the ropes. With that said Cotto was better than I thought when going backwards but I think if a fighter can sustain that pressure throughout the fight, Cotto could be exploited. Would you agree?

What do you mean "classify"...? There were those who were brilliant at it, like Azumah Nelson versus Fenech, and those who suck at it, like Miranda vs. Pavlik.

Cotto was losing rounds, because Shane was coming on strong, but who knows what would have happened had that fight been 15 rounds like it should have been. Would Cotto have dug-down and fought back harder? Would Shane have become the tank? This is why I hate 12 rounders only. But you're saying if a Fighter could be Shane Mosley going forward then Cotto could be exploited. Sure, with that hand and foot-speed, he could be. But Abdullaev got beaten stupid for it, and he was at a better weight for him, worse weight for Cotto, and he's a better pressure-Fighter IMO, hence Cotto HAVING to fight him on the back foot.

[uppercuts21]

Originally Posted by King Kabuki

What do you mean "classify"...? There were those who were brilliant at it, like Azumah Nelson versus Fenech, and those who suck at it, like Miranda vs. Pavlik.

Cotto was losing rounds, because Shane was coming on strong, but who knows what would have happened had that fight been 15 rounds like it should have been. Would Cotto have dug-down and fought back harder? Would Shane have become the tank? This is why I hate 12 rounders only. But you're saying if a Fighter could be Shane Mosley going forward then Cotto could be exploited. Sure, with that hand and foot-speed, he could be. But Abdullaev got beaten stupid for it, and he was at a better weight for him, worse weight for Cotto, and he's a better pressure-Fighter IMO, hence Cotto HAVING to fight him on the back foot.

True,

So you think the hand/foot speed was giving Cotto the most trouble and do you think Margarito can give Cotto problems and back him up or does he lack the qualities that would give Cotto difficulties?

[King Kabuki]

So you think the hand/foot speed was giving Cotto the most trouble and do you think Margarito can give Cotto problems and back him up or does he lack the qualities that would give Cotto difficulties?

I think Cotto/Margarito is a toss-up, honestly. Others might disagree, but this is one fight where they BOTH play into each other's hands. Tony will pressure, and work, but he'll swing wide. He DOES have a good uppercut, but it might be slow enough for Cotto to see coming. Cotto will be able to hit Tony, and to get close enough to do his trademark body-work he'll have to take damage, too. It should be a pretty good shoot-out.

But yeah, hand and foot speed CAN trouble Cotto. Paulie took a Hell of a beating, but he did tire Cotto out a bit with his speed and clinching. Corley gave Cotto a little trouble with his speed. However inevitably Cotto's overall skill did beat these guys silly.

IMO the only guys who can win DEFINITIVELY against Cotto are either the calibur of Mayweather AND Fighting a perfect fight, or a monster puncher who can turn his lights out...the Hearns to his Duran.

But who IS that guy for Cotto? Tony's not a monster puncher, but he'll certainly go down swinging enough to do the job. Despite what many people say about Santos and Williams, Tony hasn't been DEFINITIVELY beaten (and never stopped) since he was about the same age as Cotto was when he suffered his last loss.

[AtomicPope]

Originally Posted by Tam-Tam

Pavlik is a good fighter, but he's not that good. Certainly not "best fighter in the world" potential.

Look at the list of men who have carried that title:

Ray Robinson
Roberto Duran
Muhammad Ali
Ray Leonard
Marvin Hagler
Pernell Whitaker
Mike Tyson
Roy Jones Jr
Floyd Mayweather
Julio Cesar Chavez

Kelly Pavlik? Hmmm.

Agree.

Pavlik has grit, power, and determination but lacks the ability of other fighters on this list. He can't hit hard at every angle (he's a toe-to-toe pressure fighter). He hasn't displayed great ring generalship (he grinds his opponents down and backs them up). He doesn't put together combinations (he's a bread-n-butter jab-straight kinda fighter).


I really think that if he had a trainer like Emmanuel Stewart he'd shine. He's got potential but that's just not enough.

[Coster]

I don't think theres much of a chance of that happening, though a good fighter he looks very beatable to me.

[Dragonstyle915]

Originally Posted by Tam-Tam

Calzaghe ain't losing to a guy like Kelly Pavlik, bro.

I remember a few Jermain Taylor fans said that