Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
Quote Originally Posted by killersheep View Post
I think Paulie was trying to be as honest as he could be here. I understand the argument that Hatton bounced him around the ring for 10 rounds, but he is trying to say Cotto was the better fighter. If that's his opinion so be it. Paulie performed better against Cotto true, but he also put a lot more effort forth. I don't think that takes anything away from Hatton though. Hatton was amazing in there, still a beast, but a more patient beast, and Paulie acknowledged that. He even admitted Hatton hurt him, how often do you hear a fighter admit that? And who can better judge the abilities of two different fighters than one that's been in with both.
I'm pretty sure lots of fighters don't regard the guy that thrashed them as the best they've faced, simply because, i think, they believe they underperformed instead of getting outclassed.

Like tons of fighters who have been knocked out say it WASN'T the hardest they've been hit.

Paulie had success against Cotto.. so understandably would class his OWN performance as better.. and inturn naturally think Cotto was a better fighter than Hatton.

exactly

hatton was saying the very same things after the mayweather fight in that "he was surprised how light handed floyd was" and how "mayweather wasnt the hardest puncher he`s ever fought"

Its a boxers way of attempting to divert the attention back onto themselves by claiming in some way it was more due to them underperforming than being outclassed.