Miguel Cotto-Saul Alvarez: Post-Fight Report Card
Posted by: Cliff Rold on 11/23/2015 .
by Cliff Rold
It’s not going to go down with the best of the Mexico-Puerto Rico showdowns but Saturday night we got an interesting fight with two really good rounds (the 8th and the 12th). We also got the end of the farce that was Miguel Cotto: Middleweight.
Will we now get an even more absurd farce from Canelo Alvarez?
One thing was for certain on Saturday night. Whatever he weighed for the fight, Alvarez was clearly the middleweight in the ring. There were no day of weights announced, but he had to be in-ring somewhere in the neighborhood of what Gennady Golovkin was for his last outing.
And that’s what this really all boils down to, right? The WBC has said the Cotto-Alvarez winner must fight Golovkin or relinquish the belt. Alvarez now has that belt. Will the WBC stand by their word? Will Alvarez seek shenanigans, as champion, with weight limits the same way Cotto did in demanding none of his middleweight title fights be stipulated at the actual 160 lb. weight limit?
Let’s go the report card.
Grades
Pre-Fight: Speed – Cotto B; Alvarez B/Post: Same
Pre-Fight: Power – Cotto B+; Alvarez B+/Post: B; B+
Pre-Fight: Defense – Cotto B-; Alvarez B/Post: B-; B+
Pre-Fight: Intangibles – Cotto B+; Alvarez B+/Post: B+; A
There are plenty who saw a close fight here. It was certainly competitive but there was little doubt who the rightful winner was. The 11-1 scorecard insulted Cotto’s effort but not by that much. 8-4 or 9-3 even were fair outcomes.
Cotto did several things well. He moved, got off combinations. Canelo did most things better. For all the flash of a lot of Cotto’s work, little of it was landing. The same couldn’t be said for Alvarez. He rocked Cotto several times and took Cotto’s power fine when it got home. When exchanges broke out in the best two rounds of the fight, Alvarez was winning them. His head movement and blocking were very good on the night to compliment heavy hands.
From early on, he was winning the fight. It was evidence of why Cotto has been averse to fighting middleweights at middleweight.
He isn’t big enough.
He wouldn’t have been big enough to beat Alvarez at Jr. middleweight either, which we know because that’s pretty much where they fought. Cotto came in just below that division’s limit of 154. Alvarez was, officially, only a pound over.
Saturday revealed what many thought to be the case for the last couple years. The Cotto resurgence was as much about timing, matchmaking, and stipulations as it was performance. After losing two straight to Floyd Mayweather and Austin Trout, he wasn’t matched with fighters who could go like either again. A better, healthier Sergio Martinez would have been a test. He didn’t exist anymore. This was the first real test since those twin losses.
Cotto was better than most 35-year old’s might have been on Saturday but time doesn’t stand still. 25-year old’s that are worth investing in beat their elders. It’s the way things go. There are always exceptions; that’s normally been the rule.
Now, will the 25-year old Alvarez fight fully in the division he belongs in and make the only middleweight fight that really matters?
His history says he may surprise us. There was a time when Alvarez was being guided with kid gloves. That ended long ago. Trout, Mayweather, Erislandy Lara, and now Cotto says Alvarez will make the fights. Maybe we still end up with some pissing contest catch weight, and that would stink, but it says here that we see Golovkin get his crack at the big name he’s lacked sometime in 2016 (maybe not right away).
And Alvarez might be a tougher night for Golovkin than it appears early on. There is no substituting experience. Alvarez has seen some of boxing’s cagiest fighters. He’s not going to just lay down if, and when, he and Golovkin finally throw down.
Report Card and Staff Picks 2015: 84-23 (Including staff picks for Crolla-Perez, Abraham-Murray, and Vargas-Miura)
Miguel Cotto-Saul Alvarez: Post-Fight Report Card
@ watch the fight backwards in reverse slow motion...
out of six, one or two would land.
"