Quote Originally Posted by Rantcatrat View Post
Personally, I don't see it as close: Cotto. However, this article, Who Suffered The More Damaging Defeat, Cotto Or Pavlik?, thinks the defeats are comparable. Pavlik didn't look like damaged goods after 48 minutes of Bhop domination whereas Cotto looked like a train had hit him. Hopkins taught Pavlik a course on the sweet science, but Margarito thoroughly mauled Cotto. Pavlik never hit the canvas during his defeat, Cotto took two or three knees. Cotto couldn't finish the fight, Pavlik easily finished. Am I wrong?
Kelly Pavlik for certain the fight has basically ended his chances, against any sort of fight with Joe Calzaghe. He also lost every round to a 43 year old in which many people thought Kelly Pavlik would win. He also looked flat as a pancake.

Miguel Cotto vs Antonio Margarito was seen as a very close fight, Miguel Cotto fought a very good fight he tried his hardest. But Antonio Margarito had too good of a chin and his workrate was too much, i don't see how Miguel Cotto losing to Antonio Margarito is worse than Kelly Pavlik losing to Bernard Hopkins.

Miguel Cotto will atleast get a chance to revenge his loss, and his reputation hasn't suffered that much at all. Where as Kelly Pavlik is already getting called overrated and he will never have a chance at a rematch.