
Originally Posted by
DaxxKahn

Originally Posted by
Rantcatrat
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?
Pavlik was embaressed and everything he tried he could not get off...something like that can destroy the mentalityt of a fighter worse then a KO loss....It can make you feel like you are not worthy being at that level....You become worried in your next fight with someone of high caliber that you may be humuliated in public again...Embaressment can do crazy things to you......
Cotto was out muscled and he found out that he can not break every fighter down....it can also be very mind damaging but it as long as the fighter does not become punch shy they are usually able to recover much easier
Ok, but to put it in perspective, Bhop is an all-time-great, who has beat many great fighters (See Tito, ODLH etc.). The level you speak of is at the very, very top. Arguably the greatest super middleweight of all time, Calzaghe, had a hard time with Bhop. If I were him I would be thinking something along these lines: Pavlik lost to a legend, to have to come to grips that maybe, at 26, you are not yet a legend, doesn't seem too much to overcome. Did Bernard at 26 fight someone of Bernard at 43's level? Did Calzaghe? Did RJJ? Nope. It tooks balls. Of course, he got in over his head. But, it wasn't against some chump, it was against a great. Moreover, it wasn't at his natural weight class. And he weathered the storm pretty well: he wasn't knocked out, he never even touched the canvas.
Bookmarks