View Full Version : Prime Shane Mosley vs. Miguel Cotto at 147?
Asterion
02-02-2008, 01:57 PM
:think
klion22
02-02-2008, 01:58 PM
An aging Mosley almost beat a prime Cotto so a prime Mosley wins a clear UD IMO.
TroubleLurks
02-02-2008, 01:59 PM
An aging Mosley almost beat a prime Cotto so a prime Mosley wins a clear UD IMO. Not much more to say. Spot on.:thumbsup
Mosley.
By way of being the busier, more frenetic fighter.
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 02:00 PM
Mosley by close, but clear decision. There's a reason his nickname is "Sugar".
maciek4
02-02-2008, 02:01 PM
It would be more competitive, possibly a draw.
Prime Mosley would beat Mayweather though.
Asterion
02-02-2008, 02:02 PM
Mosley UD12.
mosley by 9 rounds. his speed was crazy.
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 02:02 PM
It would be more competitive, possibly a draw.
Prime Mosley would beat Mayweather though.
Based on what? Mosley's defense is not that good and Floyd would be able to easily outland him. Just look at how many times he was tagged by Cotto.
One point of contention though- we haven't any idea whether we have seen a prime Cotto yet. So this thread is best revisited a few years from now.
pretty boxer
02-02-2008, 02:04 PM
this is a tuff one. you cant call shane an aging mosley when he fought cotto, cuz mosley is still on top of his game. he wooped callazo badly and fought really good against cotto. he was a bit hesitant with cotto but i dont put that down to his age at all.
i'd say Dont know very tough
Relentless
02-02-2008, 02:04 PM
prime mosley would beat cotto, mayweather, williams, margarito and cintron.
Based on what? Mosley's defense is not that good and Floyd would be able to easily outland him. Just look at how many times he was tagged by Cotto.
And Floyd's activity is not what Mosely's is, so how do you so easily claim that Floyd would easily outland him?
maciek4
02-02-2008, 02:10 PM
Based on what? Mosley's defense is not that good and Floyd would be able to easily outland him. Just look at how many times he was tagged by Cotto.
Prime Mosley beat prime DLH more convincingly than prime Floyd beat an old inactive DLH.
maciek4
02-02-2008, 02:11 PM
Based on what? Mosley's defense is not that good and Floyd would be able to easily outland him. Just look at how many times he was tagged by Cotto.
Cotto would tag Mayweather just as much as he tagged Mosley.
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 02:11 PM
And Floyd's activity is not what Mosely's is, so how do you so easily claim that Floyd would easily outland him?
Cotto was able to do it and Floyd is the faster and more accurate fighter of the 2.
Executioner
02-02-2008, 02:12 PM
Mosley, obviously.
but on my satellite program, all week on HBO they are playing Best Fights of 2007 and right now it's cotto vs mosley, and I watched it last night for the 2nd time since I saw in november and that has to be one of the most overrated "close" fights i've seen.
brooklyn1550
02-02-2008, 02:12 PM
Prime Mosley beats 2007 Cotto
He could match Cotto's strength and bring the fight to him if need be
Cotto was able to do it and Floyd is the faster and more accurate fighter of the 2.
And Cotto isnt fighting a prime Mosely. :roll:
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 02:24 PM
And Cotto isnt fighting a prime Mosely. :roll:
And Mosley's defense was never top notch.:roll:
Gerard
02-02-2008, 02:31 PM
Mosley.
He dealt with the same style successfully before in his prime so for me there is no doubt.
And Mosley's defense was never top notch.:roll:
How old are you? Just out of curiosity.
I get the feeling you never watched Mosely in his best days.
brooklyn1550
02-02-2008, 02:34 PM
How old are you? Just out of curiosity.
Check his profile
Check his profile
OMG. :|:|:|:|:|
I just knew it.
196osh
02-02-2008, 02:37 PM
Mosley UD. Comfortably.
Shane_Erich
02-02-2008, 02:40 PM
I would have taken Mosley by an wide UD or late KO. A Molsey that wasn't what he used to be broke Cotto down late, what do you think a prime Mosley would have done to him?
BigReg
02-02-2008, 02:43 PM
How old are you? Just out of curiosity.
I get the feeling you never watched Mosely in his best days.
What does his age have to do with him watching Mosely in his best days? You have a picture of Kid Gavilan in your avatar. You've made threads about him, I'm sure you're not old enough to have been around when he was fighting in his prime.
What does his age have to do with him watching Mosely in his best days? You have a picture of Kid Gavilan in your avatar. You've made threads about him, I'm sure you're not old enough to have been around when he was fighting in his prime.
Age has a lot to do with maturity and depth of analysis. You are correct that anyone can watch old film, as I have of Gavilan, but it is clear to me that he hasn't watched too much of a prime Mosely, or if he has, that he is too young to make a thoughtful analysis.
Mosely didn't have the textbook skills that Mayweather has in the defensive category, but he compensated for that with his activity level, combination punching, and considerable power at the lighter weights.
Using the Cotto fight as a means of discrediting a prime Mosley suggests immaturity at best and an agenda at worst. I would venture to say that he suffers from both.
The young Mosely at 135lbs was a beast. I was living in Pomona at the time of his tenure and took interest in his fights. His first fights at 147lbs were amazing, you can't compare that Mosely to the Mosely of today.
Sorry, but age and experience speaks for something. Thats my opinion at least.
Executioner
02-02-2008, 02:55 PM
A Molsey that wasn't what he used to be broke Cotto down late
No he didnt
Snakefist
02-02-2008, 03:01 PM
Mosley never had real good defense in that way, his offense was more so his defense, and he had reflexes, I swear he moved his head more in his prime.
Relentless
02-02-2008, 03:13 PM
gonzo is another one of those who became a boxing fan after seeing floyd on mtv cribs, he is a freckled face white boy from somewhere like ann arbor michigan.
PH|LLA
02-02-2008, 04:09 PM
a prime Mosley doesn't weigh 147, so the question doesn't make much sense.
Also, Cotto may not yet have entered his prime
joito3
02-02-2008, 04:28 PM
also think that the mosley that fought dlh would have traded more with cotto and thus gotten himself into more trouble than the mosley that cotto fought who didn't trade as much
also think that the mosley that fought dlh would have traded more with cotto and thus gotten himself into more trouble than the mosley that cotto fought who didn't trade as much
That Mosely moved in and out of range quicker than this one though... a near prime Oscar wasn't able to hurt him and I dont think Cotto would of either.
I dont remember a prime Mosely really "trading" perse, but his high punch output made it appear as though he did at times.
However, I think for the most part it was strategic for him, as he could move withing range and get off 3-4 punches to another fighters 1-2 (like the first Oscar fight). But I don't qualify that as trading.
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 05:27 PM
OMG. :|:|:|:|:|
I just knew it.
Yea, so? I ahve watched alot of old tape o Shane Mosley and I can tel you he never had the best defense oout there.
Yea, so? I ahve watched alot of old tape o Shane Mosley and I can tel you he never had the best defense oout there.
Which fights?
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 05:30 PM
Which fights?
I've probably seen about half his fights on tape.
I've probably seen about half his fights on tape.
Such as? And at what weight class?
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 05:34 PM
Basically every fight this millenium except for a few, and I have see him against Jesse James Leija, Wilfredo Rivera, John John Molna, and Phillip Holiday.
Andre
02-02-2008, 05:36 PM
also think that the mosley that fought dlh would have traded more with cotto and thus gotten himself into more trouble than the mosley that cotto fought who didn't trade as much
I'd pick the Mosley that fought DLH in the first fight to KO Cotto..
Basically every fight this millenium except for a few, and I have see him against Jesse James Leija, Wilfredo Rivera, John John Molna, and Phillip Holiday.
Then you should know that his activity, body attack, combination punching, and fast hands and feet served as his defense.
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 05:40 PM
Then you should know that his activity, body attack, combination punching, and fast hands and feet served as his defense.
I'm not saying Shane isn't a very good offensive fighter, but his defense has always been vulnerable. You're making it sound like I'm saying Floyd would absoulutly dominate Shane.
I'm not saying Shane isn't a very good offensive fighter, but his defense has always been vulnerable. You're making it sound like I'm saying Floyd would absoulutly dominate Shane.
Well, this was your first post on the matter:
"Mosley's defense is not that good and Floyd would be able to easily outland him. Just look at how many times he was tagged by Cotto."
not sure there can be much debate here... a mosley that isnt as good as the one that beat oscar the first time had it decently close and had cotto on retreat the last few rounds, no doubt imo that a primed mosley eather takes the decision or stops cotto late.
JdMcNudgent
02-02-2008, 05:47 PM
Mosley does not do against defensive fighters look at the wright fight for that one. But i think a prime DLH would easly beat a prime mayweathers. It would be perfect for him. More stamina and floyd is a 1 or 2 punch fighter not big combos. Thats why mosley beat him the first fight, The second fight DLH was robbed
Gonzo
02-02-2008, 05:49 PM
Well, this was your first post on the matter:
"Mosley's defense is not that good and Floyd would be able to easily outland him. Just look at how many times he was tagged by Cotto."
I think he would outland Mosley by a pretty wide margin just becuase Mosley tends to get hit often and doesn't have a top notch defense.
Mosley does not do against defensive fighters look at the wright fight for that one. But i think a prime DLH would easly beat a prime mayweathers. It would be perfect for him. More stamina and floyd is a 1 or 2 punch fighter not big combos. Thats why mosley beat him the first fight, The second fight DLH was robbed
No and no.
First, on Wright. Thats apples and oranges. Wright was a tank at that weight with a size advantage, a southpaw stance, and a piston jab. Lets not just boild that down to "a defensive fighter" in our analysis.
Second, on DLH. He was at or near his prime in the first fight. I always thought DLH's prime was around the Quartay or Trinidad fight, and the Mosely scrap was shortly thereafter. Mosely was always too athletic and fast, and with too good of a chin for DLH to KO.
klion22
02-02-2008, 05:52 PM
Either way you slice it I feel like Cotto wins.
Mosley was experienced and technically the best he ever was when he fought Cotto late in his career.
No he wasn't in his physical prime. But when he was, may of been faster, threw more punches, but that just leaves more openings for Cotto to exploit.
I feel Cotto beats any version of Mosley.
Experience means nothing if you've lost your raw talents. Is RJJ his best ever right now because he has more experience than in 2003? Or is Hopkins his best ever because of his intelligence right now versus 2002? Please. Mosley was obviously past his prime when he fought Cotto and he still made it very competitive.
Either way you slice it I feel like Cotto wins.
Mosley was experienced and technically the best he ever was when he fought Cotto late in his career.
No he wasn't in his physical prime. But when he was, may of been faster, threw more punches, but that just leaves more openings for Cotto to exploit.
I feel Cotto beats any version of Mosley.
How so?
Many posters here are equating throwing more punches with Cotto having more openings, and doing so is a false pretense.
Mosely being faster and more active could just as easily make Cotto hesitant to throw, and could also have him hurt.
Fellas this is not brain science. Mosely landed an equal amount of power punches as a 35 year old fighter against Cotto at a weight north of what his optimal weight was (135lbs).
The best arguement for Cotto was the one I mentioned early in the thread- that Cotto hasnt yet hit his prime, so we should revisit the subject a few years from now.
klion22
02-02-2008, 06:01 PM
His optimal weight was never 135. Nor was it his best. He never even made himself a name at that weight. He killed himself to make that weight. I remember him fighting at 137 or a weight like that in the AMATEURS.
He was a natural 147 lber, and always will be.
As for my comment about his technique. Yeah, he is the best technical fighter he ever was. Why may you ask? Years in the game.
Fighter's as they get older lose speed. They lose explosiveness and the burst.
But technique always stays with them. Actually it gets better.
Look at Hopkins at 28 and Hopkins at 35.
Totally different fighters.
Dude, Hopkins is one in a million in terms of when a fighter normally peaks.
Are you really saying that the best ever Mosley we have seen is the one that fought Cotto?:patsch :nut
His optimal weight was never 135. Nor was it his best. He never even made himself a name at that weight. He killed himself to make that weight. I remember him fighting at 137 or a weight like that in the AMATEURS.
He was a natural 147 lber, and always will be.
As for my comment about his technique. Yeah, he is the best technical fighter he ever was. Why may you ask? Years in the game.
Fighter's as they get older lose speed. They lose explosiveness and the burst.
But technique always stays with them. Actually it gets better.
Look at Hopkins at 28 and Hopkins at 35.
Totally different fighters.
He was most dominant at 135lbs, thats difficult to dispute.
And as far as technique becoming better and better, I disagree. If you lose the athleticism or physical ability- what we could call the delivery system of technique- you also lose technique.
Are you saying that Tyson and Holmes had better technique at the end of their careers than in their respective primes? I wouldn't think so, and that applies to Mosley too.
Dude, Hopkins is one in a million in terms of when a fighter normally peaks.
Are you really saying that the best ever Mosley we have seen is the one that fought Cotto?:patsch :nut
Not to mention that Bernard was a late bloomer, and spent years of his life in prison.
And could it really be argued that his technique against Winky was better than his technique against Trinidad?
klion22
02-02-2008, 06:12 PM
#1 you get better with age. You may not be as good as exploiting the weaknesses...but you do get sharper.
Just my opinion.
And you are just twisting my words.
Bring up Tyson and Holmes...C'mon man that is a stretch. Yeah, the 41 year old Holmes was very technically sharp... lol lol.
And the Tyson who was a phoney after his prison stint...yeah bring him up.
I agree.
Signed, RJJ.
klion22
02-02-2008, 06:15 PM
Is PBF going to get better when he starts to lose some of his reflexes and hand speed? I mean technique only takes you so far. It's talent that is necessary to execute the technique. A fighter can have the best technique in the world but not do squat without some raw talent to back it up.
Lance_Uppercut
02-02-2008, 06:18 PM
I think he would outland Mosley by a pretty wide margin just becuase Mosley tends to get hit often and doesn't have a top notch defense.
I notice you seem to make a huge fuss over Mosely's defense, almost as if it's non-existant.
#1 you get better with age. You may not be as good as exploiting the weaknesses...but you do get sharper.
Just my opinion.
And you are just twisting my words.
Bring up Tyson and Holmes...C'mon man that is a stretch. Yeah, the 41 year old Holmes was very technically sharp... lol lol.
And the Tyson who was a phoney after his prison stint...yeah bring him up.
Ok, then apply it to any boxer. I simply don't believe its true, because the degree of athleticism/ youth/ conditioning needed to execute technique slips with age, and so technique does too.
I would argue that the prime of a fighters career (or any athlete) is the melding between their peak physical state with a seasoned mental maturity. A young athlete posseses the physical aspect, but not the mental. An old athlete posseses the mental aspect but not the physical.
A fighter like Shane is no doubt more mentaly seasoned and able to recognize openings, but is beggining to lose the physical ability to do so. So his cognitive recognition of his sport begins to exceed his physical ability to exploit them.
klion22
02-02-2008, 06:22 PM
Ok, then apply it to any boxer. I simply don't believe its true, because the degree of athleticism/ youth/ conditioning needed to execute technique slips with age, and so technique does too.
I would argue that the prime of a fighters career (or any athlete) is the melding between their peak physical state with a seasoned mental maturity. A young athlete posseses the physical aspect, but not the mental. An old athlete posseses the mental aspect but not the physical.
A fighter like Shane is no doubt more mentaly seasoned and able to recognize openings, but is beggining to lose the physical ability to do so. So his cognitive recognition of his sport begins to exceed his physical ability to exploit them.
Well said. :happy
klion22
02-02-2008, 06:23 PM
That's why athletes in most sports are considered to be in their prime from the ages of about 27-30. That's when the mental and physical aspect comes together.
Technique...never......ever....ever slips man. That is a myth.
Have you ever boxed before? Honest question.
Yes, don't bother trying that card on me- and I dont think you are following my reasoning at all.
Simply put: Technique is dependent on athleticism. Therefore, when athleticism slips techniqe slips too.
Lance_Uppercut
02-02-2008, 06:24 PM
Technique...never......ever....ever slips man. That is a myth.
Have you ever boxed before? Honest question.
Technique is more in the style in which you do something. How you do it or how long you can sustain it depends on your physical attributes.
You can have the best technique but if you can't throw like you used to because you are too old, well, that's boxing for you.
klion22
02-02-2008, 06:25 PM
Yes, don't bother trying that card on me- and I dont think you are following my reasoning at all.
Simply put: Technique is dependent on athleticism. Therefore, when athleticism slips techniqe slips too.
You are making too much sense, please stop it. :good
Technique is more in the style in which you do something. How you do it or how long you can sustain it depends on your physical attributes.
You can have the best technique but if you can't throw like you used to because you are too old, well, that's boxing for you.
Its really this simple.
:|:|:|
klion22
02-02-2008, 06:32 PM
I agree'd with you earlier.
When everythign comes together both physically and mentally you are in your physical prime.
But gym rats and long time fighters never lose that technique.
It's all in your muscle memory. It takes a while to get back.
Fighter's arent as good when they have layoffs because they aren't sharp and dont have their timing down.
But I can guarantee that they are the same on the pads. Same when hitting the double end bag or heavy bag.
It's the same way with the old timers with great technique.
They certainly cant do what they used to. But they never lose the ability and technique.
Dont believe me...ask James toney.
Again, James Toney is the exception and not the rule.
Like the other guys said, once you lose your physical talents, your ability to execute the technique goes down. While you might still execute the technique, they won't be nearly as effective because you will have lost some of that natural talent.
I agree'd with you earlier.
When everythign comes together both physically and mentally you are in your physical prime.
But gym rats and long time fighters never lose that technique.
It's all in your muscle memory. It takes a while to get back.
Fighter's arent as good when they have layoffs because they aren't sharp and dont have their timing down.
But I can guarantee that they are the same on the pads. Same when hitting the double end bag or heavy bag.
It's the same way with the old timers with great technique.
They certainly cant do what they used to. But they never lose the ability and technique.
Dont believe me...ask James toney.
This is another arguement altogehter; this is the arguement that once you know how to ride a bike you can always ride a bike. I agree.
Your other arguement was that you become better at riding a bike with age, which I don't agree with.
Boom_Boom
02-02-2008, 06:37 PM
is this even a debate?
an old Mosely fought a competitive and arguably won against a prime Cotto
now imagine a prime mosely
Relentless
02-02-2008, 07:01 PM
mosley would also beat the fuck out of floyd.
Anyone with a pair of eyes and who isn't Puerto Rican knows that Mosley won the fight. And this was and old shopworn Mosley. Imagine a prime Mosley. It would Corley/Cotto all over again with Shane actually finishing the job and putting Cotto out of his misery in front of his rabid fans in either PR or NYC.
I dont see the Corley connection.
Alo2006
02-02-2008, 09:49 PM
Prime Mosley beats a prime Cotto :yep
cuchulain
02-02-2008, 09:52 PM
He almost beat Cotto well past prime.
The prime version wins decisively.
Lance_Uppercut
02-02-2008, 09:54 PM
Cotto may turn into an excellent WW, but prime vs. prime, Cotto loses to Shane.
sweet_scientist
02-02-2008, 09:59 PM
The Shane Mosley that beat DLH would give Cotto an absolute flogging.
The current crop of welterweights is massively overrated. Guys like Cotto, Margarito, Williams and yes even Mayweather would have all been soundly defeated by the welters of the late 90's.
cpnasty
02-02-2008, 11:47 PM
Cotto would tag Mayweather just as much as he tagged Mosley.
:lol:
saul_ir34
02-03-2008, 03:06 AM
While a prime Mosley might beat Cotto. It does not change the fact that Cotto did beat a pretty game Shane. Dont kid yourselves Cotto won that fight by a margin. It was not as close as people make it out to be.
It's one of those fights thats competitive but at the end of almost every round Cotto did just enough to take that round.
Very close fight throghout but scoring wise Cotto took it by about 2-3 points.
sweetray
02-03-2008, 03:13 AM
An aging Mosley almost beat a prime Cotto so a prime Mosley wins a clear UD IMO.
I agree. I would say that the same principle applies to a prime DLH against PBF.
The Shane Mosley that beat DLH would give Cotto an absolute flogging.
The current crop of welterweights is massively overrated. Guys like Cotto, Margarito, Williams and yes even Mayweather would have all been soundly defeated by the welters of the late 90's.
Sweet_scientist can you expand on why you think this? About the current welters being so overated?
sweet_scientist
02-04-2008, 12:09 AM
Sweet_scientist can you expand on why you think this? About the current welters being so overated?
Well acb, basically from hearing opinions (which are quite prevalent around here) like that all Mayweather has to do is beat a Cotto and a Williams and he'll be a top 20, in some cases top 10 and some absolutely deluded people say, top 5 all time.
I mean, what have these welterweights (Cotto, Williams and co) actually achieved to be inflating Mayweather's standing like that?
If bouts like Mosley-Cotto don't show exactly where the current crop of welterweights are, historically speaking, then I don't know what will.
Even bouts like Mayweather-DLH (not a welterweight fight of course) should alert people to the level of some of these guys. I mean, you have a 34 year old Oscar pushing Mayweather to the brink. It doesn't take a genius to see what would have happened with a prime DLH, and DLH himself is quite overrated.
PH|LLA
02-04-2008, 12:22 AM
not sure there can be much debate here... a mosley that isnt as good as the one that beat oscar the first time had it decently close and had cotto on retreat the last few rounds, no doubt imo that a primed mosley eather takes the decision or stops cotto late.
according to Cotto, he was on the retreat in those last few rounds cause he thought the fight was in the bag, and when i saw the fight live thats what it looked like to me
brooklyn1550
02-04-2008, 12:23 AM
Sweet_scientist, what are your thoughts on a prime Quartey against the current Mayweather?
Gonzo
02-04-2008, 12:28 AM
Sweet_scientist, what are your thoughts on a prime Quartey against the current Mayweather?
Do you really think Quartey would beat Floyd?
Executioner
02-04-2008, 12:29 AM
i've been watching Cotto vs Mosley the past few days closely and I really don't see where mosley hurt him. and this 'cotto running' thing is kind of overexaggerated because he was moving, not running but still countering effectively.
he also fought toe to toe in the 11th round. it's crazy how that once he starts to move, people assume he must be hurt or something
Gonzo
02-04-2008, 12:31 AM
i've been watching Cotto vs Mosley the past few days closely and I really don't see where mosley hurt him. and this 'cotto running' thing is kind of overexaggerated because he was moving, not running but still countering effectively.
he also fought toe to toe in the 11th round. it's crazy how that once he starts to move, people assume he must be hurt or something
He was clearly hurt in one of the later rounds.
sweet_scientist
02-04-2008, 12:39 AM
Sweet_scientist, what are your thoughts on a prime Quartey against the current Mayweather?
Out of all the top welterweights of the late 90's early 00's, Trinidad, Mosley, Whitaker, DLH, Forrest, I think Floyd's best chance of a win comes against Quartey.
Quartey is VERY strong and Floyd will struggle to stand up to him, but he's also quite one dimensional. If Floyd is willing to get in range and outfight Quartey with his superior skills he might pull off the win. It will take guts to do that, because he'll get hit back hard. But if he takes the easy option and runs around looking to potshot with one shot at a time, Quartey will just continue to throw jabs that offset Mayweather and run him out of the ring whilst winning a stinker.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.