By Stephen "Breadman" Edwards
The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards tackling numerous questions related to the upcoming middleweight mega-fight between world champion Gennady Golovkin and Mexican superstar Canelo Alvarez, also question related to Floyd Mayweather Jr., and more.
Hi I know u bet on the fights lol
I want ur opinion on who wins these fights?
Ggg vs canelo?
Also does it go the distance or Ko?
I know ur busy bro please I need ur take????
Bread’s Response: I f you don’t have money to lose stay away from GGG vs Canelo. I don’t have an exact grasp on the fight. I’m slightly leaning GGG but there are variables out of the bettors control. Judges, subjective preference and GGG’s slow starts. I think the fight goes the distance… I lean GGG but expect lots of controversy and your pockets don’t understand controversy.
Huge fan of your work. Best knowledge I've witnessed ever.
Listen, I'm a Canelo fan. I must admit though that he's my number 2, just after GGG.
Still, I wanna play the devil's advocate, because in spite of his talents and resume there are a lot of things I don't understand.
Also, for a fight this huge I haven't seen many debates or hype. I don't get it. And besides boxers, I realize that a lot of writers don't pick anybody. They just call it a 50-50 fight, and I just don't get it.
I'd love a deep breakdown from you, from what you've seen and without taking sides or wishing things. It's a huge message but I broke it down in pieces so you can respond easily in spite of the length and all the info.
1. P4P rankings
I've seen pretty much all the rankings from specialist, press, writers, and sanctioning organizations.
Canelo is always top 6 P4P. I just don't understand why. Look, for example, we have Crawford in the top P4P and Ward. If you look at Bud he passes the eye test. He unified. And, according to everybody, the guy is the best active 140 pounders, and he clearly beats anyone below him. Almost everybody gives him the edge over the top 2 WW, Thurman, and Spence. Ward is definitely the best LHW. IMO he beats every Super Middleweight, and would probably be favored against any Cruiser Weight. Maybe Uzyk is the toughest.
GGG wiped out the whole MW division. I doubt any Junior Middleweight would be favored by the bookies. Well, you get my point.
Yes Canelo is skilled and has a huge potential and has great names on his resume, but:
He's always a lot bigger in the ring, is always a favorite (besides Floyd) and hasn't fought great opposition for a long time. His best wins are Trout (strong gatekeeper now) and Lara (almost controversial). He beat Miguel Cotto, a much smaller guy and the fight was closer than the official judges had it (a lot of boxing people had it even or 5-7). Besides that, Smith, Khan, Kirkland, and Chavez are not what we can call good opposition. Yet, the guy is P4P best. You even rank him there in the top 10.
Why? Is it about potential? Eye test? Name on the resume (despite the conditions: Loss against Floyd, Mosley at 40 who was a light and welter weight or close fight against an aging lighter Cotto?).
Do you think he beats everyone at JMW? Don't you think Lara troubles him again? Andrade? Soro? Charlo 1? J-Rock? And let's be crazy, Errol Spence at 155?
Do you think he beats everyone at MW? Don't you think Lemieux can land huge? Don't you think Derevyancheko can beat him? Do you think Canelo beats Jacobs?
My point is; Almost everyone on the web, writers, and fans, think Jacobs (because of his size, skills and style) beats Canelo. You, as a trainer and a boxing erudite, told me twice you don't even think he beats every SWW. Yet he's P4P.
How can a guy (who's never fought at 160) can be considered a top P4P fighter when the global consensus is that he might be beaten by a couple of JMW and MW, when the other guys in the top 10 are clearly the best in their divisions, often times above and below?
Do you think Canelo was prepped the right way? I mean look; GGG is a huge MW puncher with a high KO rate. Canelo spent his career fighting old WW at SWW. The biggest punchers were a shot Angulo, a shot Kirkland, and a dead Chavez. He never came close to taking a decent punch in a fight.
IMO he should have faced a solid MW gatekeeper like Rosado or Murray, maybe a less skilled powerful puncher (Lemieux, Stevens) and then a strong MW like Johnson or Derevyanchenko.
Don't you think Charlo 2 is a tough tough fight for him?
Don't you think Monroe can stick and move all night without getting caught (since he doesn't pressure and cut off the ring?). What about the 6.2 feet Andy Lee or a sharp BJS/Eubank Jr in England?
Can you give me your thoughts about all these matchups?
After that, he would have been ready for GGG, and still, I would have favored the Kazak.
So again, I'm sure he might lose against 2/3 people in each division. Yet, because of his aura, charisma, skills and drawing power, we'd put him top 10 P4P and best in his division.
3. Styles makes fights, but...
Do you think the Canelo we saw against Smith beats Jacobs, former Murray, Lemieux and Brook and stop them?
Do you think, on the other hand, that Smith goes past round 4, and that Cotto and Chavez finish the fight on their feet against GGG?
4. Power vs Skills
Lot's of the fans (casuals included) call it a Power vs Skills match-up. I've even seen Pro boxers (famous) saying that. They say Canelo's ring IQ is huge and that GGG has power.
How crazy is that? Would you even say that Canelo's skills are better?
I agree that he's more flashy and has great (and impressive) defense (upper body movements) but GGG's defense is really good too, and subtle (parrying, blocking, great footwork, etc).
It has been sold as a 80/20 fight one year ago. Now it's a 50/50 fight. I just don't get it.
I think about it every day. Always the same story. Aging, young lion, faster hands, power, skills, style suited...
One year ago, GGG takes 5 rounds to stop Brook in the UK. He loses maybe 2 rounds. Then he fights Jacobs, a huge MW fighting his best fight ever. The fight goes to the decision. It's said GGG is slipping, getting old.
Canelo stops Smith after 9 rounds. He then batters JCC Jr during 12 rounds. He shows stamina (against two guys who didn't hit him back). One is two classes below, the other is almost dead on his feet before the fight even starts. Now Canelo is a defensive genius and the fight is a 50/50.
That's how the official story goes. How we sell the fight. Do you believe in that? I'm not talking about projections here but actual level, skills, power. From what we have seen, is Canelo ready to beat GGG?
Can he outbox him in spite of being flat footed? Can he hurt him although his power is not even the best at 154, let alone 160 when GGG took flush shots from Jacobs, Stevens, Murray and Lemieux and smiled and kept moving forward? Can Canelo sustain a 12 rounds aggression from the best chin alive (with Garcia, Kamegai, and Chocolatito) from a hard hitting MW when he has never faced a pressure fighter for 12 rounds, not even at WW or JMW? Can he stop him?
Can he out jab (although he has a great jab) the best active jabber (besides Linares) and number one according to CompuBox.
I'm not accusing anyone or anything and I know how careful you are with that, but, me and my friends went to see Canelo and GGG in LA for their press work out. Canelo looked really sharp on the mitts. We noticed that Canelo was a lot bigger, stronger and more defined than ever before. He's now at 160 but fought at 154, 155 and 164.5 (lol), yet we've never seen him so big and muscular. He looks like Mike Tyson from behind. Look at his trapezoids.
He's so ripped. We were wondering what happened and if by any chance he would have taken anything. What do you think about his body transformation?
GGG is a draw. Canelo is a bigger one. He's Mexican and younger. Future of boxing. GGG has never fought in Vegas.
Canelo had a huge scoring advantage against Cotto against a less close fight. He got a draw against Floyd from one judge and won against Lara and Trout. Do you really, honestly, think GGG has a chance if it goes to the scorecard? If Canelo wins 3 rounds and has flashy moments, with the crowd reacting and GGG blocking, parrying I can totally see the judge giving him the fight.
GGG has to clearly dominate and/or stop him in order to get the win. I don't see the system spitting on their cash cow, especially now that Pacquiao and Mayweather are (kinda) retired.
I know you hate conspiracy theories and people that believe in them, but I just don't get it. Something is off, something is missing. One guy is the best of his division, cleaned it, got almost all the title. The other one is coming from a lighter weight, where he ruled because of his business power because he's an A list. He was never impressive. Never I read someone saying: WAOUH, what a performance by Alvarez. Yet, we always expect more from him, but never get what we want. In a way he reminds of Broner before, but only in the fact that we judge him through what we expect from him or because of the age factor, which shouldn't be the case by the way because certain fighter decline faster or can't keep their effectiveness getting older (imagine if Tyson had stayed serious, his style wouldn't have transferred well in his 30s).
He lost, he got wins when he shouldn't have. He brilliantly picked the best opponent with the less risk and the maximum profit. Now he fights a top 5 MW of the last 20 years and everyone says he's gonna win because he likes to counter on the ropes and has good upper body movement? Come on Bread, help me with that. I love him, and after the GGG Era he's my man, I'll support him. But I think the best is yet to come, and judging from the past, I still see him as a HUGE underdog.
Sorry for the language (it's my second one) and the long mail. I've wanted to share this for now 2 months.
I wish you and your family the best!
And keep up the good work with J-Rock!
Diego from Spain
Bread’s Response: What’s up bro? Thanks for writing in. I will answer you this time but please try to condense the questions.
1. You make a great point. There are guys that I don’t think Canelo would beat at 154 and possibly 160. I think GGG can beat more people of you lined up guys at 154 and 160. But Canelo does pass the eye ball test to an extent. You can see his talent. He also fought Lara a guy no one really wants to fight. He’s also had favorable matchmaking because of his marketability. Therefore he has been able to get fights and a platform that they fighters you named can’t get. Right or wrong, we know more about Canelo and he has achieved more because of this.
For example he got to fight Khan and ko him. We can assume most of the others would have but he actually did it. He got to fight Liam Smith and James Kirkland and KO them. He got to fight Cotto and beat him. None of these other young guns can get those kind of fights. Think about that. Canelo’s lofty ranking is directly connected to his marketability.
But this does not mean he can’t beat GGG. He has a good shot whether you accept it or not. When you have a machine behind you and favorable matchmaking where the variables of a fight usually benefit you, your chances become greater. Canelo is never up against it in a fight. On top of that, he can fight and does have talent.
2. I don’t have a problem on how Canelo was prepped. If he fought all of the guys you named he would possibly lose and the Super Fight would not be a Super Fight anymore. You have to factor in the matchmaking. It’s one of the reasons why I don’t attack GGG’s resume. Fighters just don’t play with slick boxers like Willie Monore, Brutal punchers like David Lemiuex and Curtis Stevens, and big well rounded guys like Martin Murray. Canelo surely didn’t try any of them to prep for the big dog. It’s simply easier to match Canelo than it is GGG.
You also have to factor in Canelo’s confidence. If he struggles with any of the aforementioned then his confidence could get shot going into the GGG fight. I get what you’re saying but for a fighter with the aura of Canelo they did the right thing in staying away from the guys you named.
3. GGG does better against the field. Meaning he punches so hard that he beats more people. But that doesn’t mean he beats Canelo. Foreman did better vs Frazier and Norton than Ali. But Ali beat Foreman. You can’t go by that.
4. GGG is very clever and skillful. He’s accurate and he has special punch variety and delivery. His defense is probably his weakest area. It isn’t horrible because he can’t over move. If he did he wouldn’t be a destroyer. It’s just not Chavez Sr or Duran for that style. It will be a key in this fight. I think he’s very skillful. Punchers don’t get the tag of being skillful because they end their fights on physicality.
Canelo is also very skillful. He has great punch sequence and delivery. His combinations could be the most unique I have ever seen. He really runs them off. He also is a great counter puncher. He’s short so he has developed a slip and roll game. His skill is more noticeable. It’s loud but it’s real.
5. In all honesty I favored GGG more a year ago. Maybe Danny Jacobs did fight over his head. Maybe he fought better than he ever has or will again. That can happen. But GGG was a little slow in getting off vs Jacobs for some reason. Maybe it was Jacobs, maybe it was him. But here is the thing. When a fighter has difficulty in 2 fights in a row at 35 years old, the masses will criticize. At the end of the day, who cares what “they” say. Here is Golovkin’s chance to show he hasn’t slowed. Personally I don’t like to hold a small microcosm as the rule. Fighters can have off nights in their primes. So when a guy has an off night at 35 we say he’s old. It’s almost not fair but 35 is a drop off age for clean fighters. So…
6. This fight needs to be done under VADA. So much depends on it if it’s not we can get a tainted result. I heard it is. But the thing about drug testing is if it doesn’t start before the camp then I don’t believe in it all the way. You can cycle for the few months you are waiting to announce the fight then taper off once the fight gets signed and go through camp with the benefits. 75% of the top guys I suspect of cheating these days. It’s pretty obvious. One of the reasons why this fight has closed in odds is because GGG is 35 and has been testing VADA, so he has looked human vs top level fighters.
7. It just depends on who the judges are. Some judges are influenced and some call good fights and are objective. I assume each team will pick good judges that favor their style and have not turned in any off cards.
Canelo did well early vs Floyd but CJ Ross overcompensated down the stretch. Floyd took over in the 2nd half of the fight. What was bizarre to me was Ross had already turned in a bad scorecard in Pacquiao vs Bradley1. No one flagged her. She was still allowed to score Mayweather vs Canelo. If I see a judge on this panel that has turned in a really odd scorecard then it will make me uneasy. Canelo has always received the benefit of doubt. But he does throw judge friendly eye catching punches and he is the crowd favorite. It scares me for GGG because GGG is the plodder in this fight like Hagler was vs Leonard.
To be fair though GGG got full credit for his work vs Danny Jacobs. I know a large % of boxing insiders who feel Jacobs won. So it’s not like GGG has been screwed over before. Let’s hope the judges call it fair.
I pray you and your family are doing great . I know you probably don’t believe this but I keep you and your loved ones in prayer even though I have never met you personally because you appear to be a good person and I love your intelligence. You remind me of a lot of my personal friends . You just have good common sense which a lot of people don’t have today. I just came back from vacation and read your mailbag and was overjoyed to see you printed so many responses. Keep up the great work because you are always a great read and you are greatly appreciated by boxing fans around the world.
God bless and take care,
Blood and guts from Philly.
Bread’s Response: Thank you my man. If you ever see me in Philly walk up and say hello.
You said 90% of your emails are about the May-Mac fight, but I'm over here wracked with indecision about the GGG vs Canelo fight.
When you see what you see (their interviews, padwork, habits, existing history etc.) this close to the fight, does anything become clearer? Any red flags from either side or anything out of the ordinary in a good or bad way?
In a recent email response you said that certain fights (Taylor vs Chavez Sr and others) you felt a cloud looming over the head of a certain fighter. Do you have any of those instincts going into this fight? Much has been made of Canelo's shape going into this fight. His self-belief is probably cranked into overdrive. Maybe Tyson's old aphorism: "everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face," happens and Canelo has an "oh sh*t!" moment (maybe I'm just crossing my fingers for GGG). Golovkin seems subtle and understated, both physically and mentally going into this bout (which is about par for the course for him). Has he checked out or is he just not overthinking things?
People are raving about Canelo's uppercuts in this fight, but GGG has a sadistic right uppercut that comes from no where. Does Canelo's stance and style negate the right upper?
Lastly, people say GGG has slipped in his last two fights, but Canelo has gotten better. I think the competition was matched in a way where GGG was gonna look more mortal. GGG would have wrecked Smith and Chavez quicker, but Canelo would have maybe took longer to find Brook and maybe lost to Jacobs (on that night Jacobs overperformed to expectations). Thoughts?
Looking forward to your thoughts. Lots to answer, thanks in advance!!
Bread’s Response: They both look ready to go. But Canelo looks maniacal. His intensity looks next level. He’s locked in because he knows the danger of his opponent. The technical thing that stands out is Canelo is countering on the pads in combination. His hands are also faster. GGG really has work cut out for him because multiple flashier shots will catch the judges attention more than methodical power punches.
I hate that you asked me about the aura I feel. Because I do have one and I hate it because I can’t shake it. I just can’t. I don’t even want to speak on it at this time.
You have good boxing eyes. Canelo’s stance defends against uppercuts better. He doesn’t bend his head over his front foot. GGG is more squared up and he bends more. I think Canelo’s uppercut will land often.
I agree about the last two opponents. GGG had to fight who was willing to fight him. Canelo gets to fight who he wants to fight. GGG stops Liam Smith in 3 rounds and Chavez within 7. Brook while still undefeated would have been right with Canelo and I feel the Danny Jacobs who fought GGG would outpoint Canelo. So you make a great point but here is the thing. That’s why so much is in Canelo’s favor because he doesn’t have to take those kinds of fights. It’s not fair but it’s the game.
First up, the "fight". We've talked about it already but I'm picking GGG because I see Canelo having to fight more of a "perfect" fight to win than GGG. First, Canelo has to either win the jabbing contest or negate GGG's with the slip/right counter he's good at. He cannot outbox him without winning that battle. 2nd, he's got to be able to eat power he's never come CLOSE to seeing. He has to be tough enough to stay in the fire, smart enough to grab/move and take temporary "Ls", and know the appropriate situation to do each without crowd or machismo influence. He also has to put enough on GGG to get his respect. An unabated GGG is bad news. As discussed, there's nothing overly complicated about GGG but a puncher with a jab who can take a punch is easy to analyze but hard to beat. Plus, he seems mentally tough so it will take a special or bigger/very good fighter to straight beat him. I don't see Canelo being that.
2nd, Floyd's legacy. I agree with your assessment. He handled all his business and the 2 times he barely got by, he easily beat both in immediate rematches. His domination of Corrales was THE signature performance in a big fight of the 2000s. If he ducked anybody, I think it was more business than fear. The only fighter of his era that I thought would be a bad matchup for him was the late Vernon Forrest but their axis's didn't cross at 147 so I have zero issues with his resume. Historically? While I don't think he'd go undefeated against the all-time creme of the crop from 130-147, he'd do more than well in a tournament. Style wise, the only fight that I'd bet the house against him on is Hearns at 147. With that jab and length, NOBODY outboxes Tommy so if you can't go get and hurt him, you can't beat him. I don't see Floyd doing that and would lose in a similar fashion that Benitez did. I also watched the Burton fight again the other day and some of his mannerisms and moves reminded me of Aaron Pryor. Per Floyd, Burton was his toughest fight and of course Pryor was much better than Burton. That fight at 140 would be a blood bath with one or both never being the same afterwards. Besides other obvious mythical matchups, I also think a 130 fight with the late Camacho Sr would be intriguing. Before Rosario, Camacho was a damn beast and IMO, the fastest hand/foot guy I've ever seen so Floyd would have to win that from the neck up and with more heart (ala Judah). TBE? I don't endorse that but I do believe he did enough to be in the conversation and he gets MAJOR props for the business moves he made in the latter part of his career. He's obviously TRE (The Richest Ever) and if he stays RETIRED, he's TSE (The Smartest Ever).
Lastly, Julian Jackson. I believe that along with Tyson he's the best pure 2-handed puncher of my 37 years of watching boxing and deserves all-time consideration. With that and his resume to include 2 divisions and cracking Terry Norris's chin, why isn't he in the hall of fame? I love Riddick Bowe and believe he's the most skilled 230+ pounder in history but no way should he or guys like Ray Mancini be in the hall over the Hawk.
Bread’s Response: GGG is not hard to figure out. He’s very simple. He comes forward behind a jab and he tries to wreck your life. He’s hard to beat however because he’s vicious puncher with both hands, he has pedigree, he’s accurate, he has a great chin and he does not stop coming. In my opinion this fight comes down to 2 things. Can Canelo take his punches without putting his offense away? When Canelo gets tired can he overcome it and still win rounds. It’s that simple. If Canelo can do those two things he wins. I just don’t know if he can…..
That is a great and fair assessment on Floyd Mayweather. I have nothing to add or take away.
Julian Jackson should be in the HOF. There where better middleweights and junior middleweights….But when you have a unique gift like he had you should be considered. Jackson and Prince Naseem Hamed are the best 2 fisted, 10 count KO artist I have seen in my lifetime. I have seen both of them KO opponents with either hand for the complete 10 count at least 15 times apiece. Not stoppages, not overwhelming referee rescues, not 3 knockdowns. I’m talking BOOM and a count 1 through 10.
Jackson was also able to win the middleweight title a few times along with having a really good run at junior middleweight. He showed excellence in his prime. He showed resiliency after losses. And he kod two excellent opponents in Herol Graham and Terry Norris. He should be in the HOF easy. I want to add one more thing. Jackson was severely under promoted. Can you imagine a puncher like Jackson in HD right now on primetime? Despite his incredible ko% and power he was rarely a main even fighter and he never got the star treatment.
It's been a long time since I've wrote in but I never miss a mailbag. Keep up the great work as always. I have a few thoughts/questions for you.
1. Now that Mayweather has hung up the gloves for good, do you think that his career choices during the "Money" era would have been viewed more favorably without the emergence of Manny Pacquiao? Most of the people that I've talked to that hate him usually point to the "Money" era as the time that his opponent selection became very ummm "selective" lol. Looking at his fights from 2010-2015 strictly ON PAPER however, his accomplishments were pretty impressive.
He won the lineal welterweight title from Mosley, got the WBC welterweight from Victor Ortiz, got the vacant Ring welterweight title with Robert Guerrero, then took the WBC/RING/vacant lineal junior middleweight belts from Canelo Alvarez. ( I would have mentioned the WBA belts from Miguel Cotto and Marcos Maidana but the WBA creates too many belts lol. How many versions of the same belt can the WBA create while still keeping a straight face?!?)
I personally think that if the "Manny" fight cloud didn't hang over him during that span his choices during the "Money" era wouldn't have been as heavily scruntinized as it did.
(For the record, I would have rather for him to have tried to become the undisputed welterweight champion owning all of the belts during that time and simply fighting the number one contenders during his welterweight reign.)
What are your thoughts Bread?
Bread’s Response: Floyd Mayweather’s retirement from 07-09 allowed the rise of Manny Pacquiao. If you remember Oscar was coming to 147 to fight Floyd in a rematch. That’s why he fought Steve Forbes at the catchweight of 150. Oscar only called Manny out when Floyd retired and was unavailable. So Manny’s great run was based on Floyd not being around. Manny was already a Hof before he went to welterweight but the PPV, megastar popularity took off with the Oscar fight. It’s sort of bizarre to think about but Manny wouldn’t have had that run if Floyd was still there. He had just looked spectacular at 135 against David Diaz. There was NO reason for him to jump two weight divisions….Oscar was the jewel accomplishment.
Credit to Manny he took a fight many wouldn’t have and delivered historically. Manny was Floyd’s #1 competition to his throne. There is no doubt. He won Fighter of the Decade in the 2000s and he won the most FOY in that decade. He also was the only fighter who would have been less than a 2 to 1 underdog to beat Floyd during those years. Some historians like Max Kellerman still rate Manny’s career over Floyd’s.
I think what happened with the fans of both is they drew the line. After Manny beat Oscar it was an unwritten rule saying you can’t like Manny and Floyd at the same time. So Floyd’s fans said Manny’s rise in weight was unnatural and he was the Catch Weight King. Manny’s fans said Floyd was a Businessman and Manny beat their common opponent’s more convincingly. What was lost is that both were great and there was no need to tear either of them down to build the other up?
I can’t remember so many people criticizing either fighter before Manny beat Oscar. As soon as that happened and they became viable opponents for each other the critics came out and they never stopped criticizing.
Hello Mr Breadman, I'm an English boxing fan and always love reading your column, you are incredibly knowledgeable.
My question may be a touchy one but I'd love your opinion on it.
It involves Edwin Valero, I'm not going to go into his personal life but I would love to know how you rate him purely as a boxer.
For me personally he is one of the best I've ever seen, I used to love watching him fight, he seemed as if he was made for fighting and was a beast in the ring.
Like I said I'd love to know your opinion on him (purely boxing related).
Mat from Stoke
Bread’s Response: Edwin Valero was a heck of a fighter. He had fast hands, he was fearless, he had good footwork and he was a hard puncher. He reminded me of Manny Pacquiao but he wasn’t quite the athlete Pacquiao was and he was a step slower although he was very fast.
Sometimes when a career gets ended abruptly then athletes get slightly overrated because we don’t get to see them in all phases of adversity. I remember there was talks of Valero fighting Tim Bradley before he died. We would have found out everything we needed to find out about him in that fight.
Valero was one of the better junior lightweights and lightweights during his career but it’s too difficult for me to rate him as a guy who would have defeated like a Pacquiao like some say he would have. I had not seen enough of him and for as good as he was he wasn’t untouchable. Just look at his fights on youtube. See Antonio Demarco for example.
I say great potential. But he was going into that next phase to prove his greatness. He never made it to that phase because of that untimely death.
Okay let's start off with accountability.
The last couple of mailbags insulations have been floated around around about Pacquiao been on roids before JMM IV. I'm okay with that accusation as long as it's noted that Marquez looked like a sculpted adonis during that fight.Next, how many times has floyd been popped for using one for of PED or another?
Floyd Mayweather has always taken the argument out of who can beat him as far as the competition that he faced. In his two controversial fights he gave immediate rematches and won both more convincingly.
This statement I have a problem with. Why? Because he lost both fights which we have agreed upon and he won both rematches clean. close with Castillo, Maidana 2 he won wide.
Since every Floyd fan hangs off his nuts with this undefeated bullsh*t it would be nice for the truth to be out there in print because we both know Floyd has lost twice.
You can't take the argument out of who beat him if he has already lost twice!
While we're on the subject of his "greatness" and since he lost two fights, how many other great fighters did Floyd beat in his prime? Since that determines the ultimate goal of were a boxer cements his place as a HOF or ATG I would like to hear your opinion on that.
I have Hatton and Corrales and Castilo 1. Maidana has already lost to Khan which is not prime level championship boxing.
What about Floyd's 2 long-layoffs:
About 1 year off between Cotto and Guerrero
Almost 2 year break between Hatton and Ortiz.
The debacle surrounding the Pacquiao suit which team Mayweather quickly settled out of court for a rather high fee.
Name one remotely serious risk FMJ made after Castillo 2 other than Maidana 1?
I'd rather get slaughtered by telling the truth over talking abou Mayweather's greatness. Is he a great fighter? Sure. Did he take on the risks of fights other great boxers to solidify his own greatness-NO
His greatness is based on longevity and the misconception that he has remained undefeated. If he has fought Paul Williams and then Margarito then we can start about true ATG status.
The hypothetical fights against Duran, Leonard etc are pure rubbish when he missed so many other great fighters in his own era. It's a joke to even go down that road.
This is your house/mailbag Bread so you have all the power to write back whatever you want.
Yes if you put in print that you believe that he lost two two fights you will get plenty of "fan mail ", who cares at least you would be telling the truth.
And let's keep it real every black male in America will hate on you simply because Floyd is black and they follow boxing-it's that simple.
And let's not forget the Floyd obsessionistas, those who know nothing about boxing aside from tuning into Floy fight yet haven't a clue about the actual sport.
That's it for now I can much deeper with this!
Bread’s Response: My assessment of Floyd Mayweather as an all time great fighter has nothing to do with him being black. Race has nothing to do with it and you’re wrong for bringing it up. Now it seems you want to challenge me to post your comment. Are you serious? Are you that upset about me saying Floyd is an All Time Great Fighter? I have no problem posting your opinion, here it is…I’m going to address each section of your comment piece by piece. Before I start you have to realize that greatness is subjective. But there are some opinions that hold a stronger value. More historians will rank Floyd as an All Time Great than historians who won’t. So while you’re upset with my opinion realize that you’re in the minority.
Here is how I feel about PEDs. If you aren’t doing VADA 365/24/7 then anyone can be suspect. Period. I never insinuated Pacquiao was on anything. I was never one to do that about him because at the time of the accusations we didn’t know enough about random testing and what drug testing agencies were the best etc. I always thought Pacman was a great fighter when I first saw in in 2002. He didn’t come out of nowhere in my eyes. If a fighter has not tested positive we can speculate all we want. I’m not going to publicly be reckless and accuse anyone of cheating without factual proof. You can as a fan but when you’re in an accountable position it doesn’t make sense and it can cause you to get sued!
Floyd Mayweather has defeated every fighter he has faced. It doesn’t matter if his record was 48-2 or 50-0. Lennox Lewis lost to Oliver McCall and Hasim Rahman. He had a draw with Evander Holyfield. So he didn’t have a perfect record but he defeated every man he ever faced during his career. You misunderstood my comment and snapped without understanding it. Ray Robinson held that same moniker after over 130 fights until he lost to Joey Maxim..
A loss is no big deal to me. When they marketed Tito Trinidad as undefeated I always thought he lost to Oscar De La Hoya but it didn’t make me discredit Tito. In the Oscar fight that just wasn’t his night. Whitaker had a loss before he hit the mainstream but I always viewed him as the best fighter in boxing during his prime. If you fight enough tough fighters, and variety of styles you will take a loss or fight a controversial fight. I have no problem saying I think Floyd lost Castillo1 and Maidana1. I don’t score fights at home but I think he lost those fights. I also think he deserves major props for being an honorable champion and giving both of those fighters IMMEDIATE REMATCHES. He didn’t wait. He didn’t posture. If you take your feelings out of it and be objective you will admit that he was honorable in giving those guys rematches. Especially when neither was an A side star and had no real leverage.
So again Floyd has taken the argument out of who he can beat because when he had controversial fights and got controversial decisions. He fought rematches and won CLEAN.
Floyd has defeated Hatton, Cotto, De La Hoya, Mosley, Marquez, Pacquioa and Gatti. All of those fighters are either in the HOF or going on the 1st ballot. That’s 7 HOF fighters. They all weren’t in their prime. But if you’re objective you will look to see that all of them were champions when he fought them and some of them were younger than he was age wise…..
Corrales and Castillo were in their prime. Genaro Hernandez was still a very good fighter and he is HOF caliber. Are you really mad because I think Floyd is an all time great and he may have beaten 10 HOF fighters?
Let’s just say Corrales, Castillo and Hernandez don’t get in, because they may not. Floyd Mayweather has still defeated 7 HOF champions while they were champion. How can he not be an all time great? Even if you don’t like him you couldn’t name me another fighter who has defeated that many HOF and is not considered an all time great.
I often see Floyd compared to Pernell Whitaker and Julio Cesar Chavez. For as great as Whitaker is and I believe he’s truly special and he could be the best fighter of the last 25 years. Whitaker only has 1 HOF victory over Azumah Nelson. Let’s give him 2 because he really beat Chavez. Chavez only has 2 in Edwin Rosario and Hector Camacho. What they both have is a lot of capable real contenders like the Maidana’s and Castillo’s which often times are tougher fights than bigger names. I get it and I understand the risk of fighting the best available guy constitently. But Floyd has 7 HOF that you can’t ignore.
On top of that only 3 men in history have won a 130lb title and a 154lb title. Manny Pacquiao, Oscar De La Hoya and Floyd Mayweather. Only Duran, Whitaker, De La Hoya, Pacquiao, Mosley and Mayweather have won titles at 135 and 154. Only Whitaker, De La Hoya, Cotto, Pacquiao and Mayweather have all won titles at 140 and 154. Floyd also won 4 lineal titles. That’s not easy.
Floyd is in very select company for his achievements. Everyone on that list is an all time great except for maybe Cotto and Mosley. And they are contemporary greats at least. If you think Floyd is not an all time great you’re truly mistaken.
I agree that Floyd has misses. He has enough to not make him better than Robinson or Ali. But why would black people be mad at me for saying that? Floyd has more misses than they do. It’s not an opinion it’s a fact. And it’s really not an argument. You can’t argue a fact. You may be able to argue the reason WHY fights didn’t happen but you can’t argue if it ever happened or not.
Floyd’s legacy is based off longevity and consistent winning, and maybe he wouldn't have lasted so long if he took harder fights, who knows and I get your point.. To steal a quote from Max Kellerman and I agree with him wholeheartedly. Floyd Mayweather is like Hank Aaron of baseball. There was a time when baseball and boxing where America’s two biggest sports.
Floyd is a guy who hits 40 homeruns every year for 20 straight years. That’s pretty accurate. He may not have the high peak of Roy Jones who looked like Babe Ruth or Barry Bonds from 94-96. But he also does not have the drop off that Jones had either. I get it and I agree with Kellerman.
I will also agree that Floyd took more chances and had a more line them up attitude in his younger years. Once he became the A side after the Oscar fight he made more business decisions than he did when he was younger, like for example when he beat Genaro Hernandez then like 2 months later he smoked Angel Manfredy in 2 rounds just to secure the 1998 Fighter of the Year.
But this is something that you have to realize and don’t let your dislike for him cloud your judgment. He was already a HOF before he fought Oscar in 2007. He was already a 4 division champion and a great fighter before he changed his aggressive matchmaking approach.
I hope you enjoyed the respectful response. I hope you respect the fact that you can’t call my bluff and challenge me to post a question. I don’t fear anything on this earth. Lastly I hope you learn how to take your emotions out of certain things. Someone’s difference of opinion shouldn’t upset you so much especially when your opinion is the least recognized on the matter.
Send Questions to [email protected]