By Stephen "Breadman" Edwards
The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards discussing topics such as Errol Spence, Premier Boxing Champions making moves with fights, Gennady Golovkin vs. Kelly Pavlik, the injuries being suffered by Juan Manuel Marquez, Hurd vs. Trout, and more.
Out of all of the PBC boxers who have won belts Errol Spence seems to be the one marketed for real pound for pound greatness. Besides Floyd Mayweather who is his own entity the PBC doesn’t really have anyone on the P4P top 10. Now that Spence is a champion I think he actually wants to be great not a businessman. He seems to be saying the right thing about fighting the best and unifying. He also seems willing to stay active. Do you agree? Who do you think his very next fight will be against?
Bread’s Response: I actually agree about Spence. Something tells me the kid wants to be great and he really means. He didn’t have to go to the UK and fight what was perceived to be the toughest champion in his division.
The PBC puts on the most fights and has the most fighters. But if you look at the actual top great fighters in boxing. You have Ward, Kovalev, Alvarez, Golovkin, Gonzales, Lomachenko, Crawford, Joshua, Inoue, Rigondeaux etc etc. Towards the lower end of the top 10 you may be able to throw Keith Thurman or Leo Santa Cruz in. But no one would argue they are top 5.
You are the first person to point out the PBC doesn’t have top 10 p4p guys. Spence is hot right now. He’s in his prime. He just scored a great victory on the road against a real champion. You also get the feeling that if you match him tough he can win the tough fights. He’s also in boxing’s greatest division historically. Spence is a big deal and I think you’re correct. In my opinion he’s probably the one PBC fighter who can contend for the best P4P fighter in the world.
I think his very next fight will have to be against a recognizable name but I don’t think it will be a unification. Spence said he wants to go straight to a unification but Thurman has 2 of the belts and Pacquiao has the other. Neither would be available and Spence has to fight again this year. With the PR push he has it would make no sense for him to not fight again this year. My guess is an ex world champion like Lamont Peterson. Or maybe Omar Figueroa if he beats Robert Guerrero.
Right now at the halfway point of the year who would be your Fighter of the Year and Trainer of the Year?
Bread’s Response: Anthony Joshua would be my Fighter of the Year. Derrick James would be my Trainer of the Year.
But it’s early my friend, we aren’t even at the half way point. The half way point is July 1st. There are some big fights coming up that will influence things. For instance the winner of Ward vs Kovalev. If one of those HOF put on a great performance they will probably win FOY. Same thing with GGG vs Canelo. Also all of the trainers involved move to the forefront as TOY. Those are some huge fights.
Then you have dark horses like Leo Santa Cruz and Keith Thurman who scored huge victories early in the year and have a chance to get one more big victory in before the year is out.
And don’t forget about Mikey Garcia. He has big victory early in the year. He has a huge fight vs Adrien Broner set for the summer. If he wins the Broner fight and squeezes one more big one in before the year is out he has a legitimate shot because he would be the only elite level fighter to have 3 huge victories in one year. So let’s see how the rest of the year plays out.
What do you think of Juan Manuel Marquez’s constant injuries? He has yet another one. He seems to escape the PED critics but to me he is the most obvious PED user who has not tested positive. Marquez was always great and always a tremendous puncher but his body transformation in his late 30s and 40s is unprecedented. Then his delay of testing vs Tim Bradley and to lose the fight tells me all I need to know. How does Marquez escape the PED scrutiny. And where does his victory over Pacquiao rank historically , with the high PED speculation?
Bread’s Response: Marquez’s constant injuries tell me at 45 he should consider retiring. 45 years old for an ex featherweight is beyond ancient. I’m not sure if any fighter in the history of boxing who started at featherweight was still a viable welterweight in their 40s. His body has to be stressed.
You’re correct Marquez has always been great. I knew he was special when I watched him lose to Fredy Norwood many years ago. But you are correct again. He does escape lots of the PED critics over the last 7 or 8 years. I don’t want to speculate because if he’s clean it’s not fair to his legacy.
His body transformation is not speculation. It’s obvious. It’s a fact that he gained mass and became more definitive in his late 30’s and early 40s. How he did it I don’t know?
Many people don’t know there was some controversy in the PED testing vs Bradley. That’s not speculation that’s a fact. And yes Marquez did lose the fight after agreeing to the test. That’s another fact.
Marquez’s victory over Pacquiao is along with Sanchez over Gomez, Barrera over Hamed and Chavez over Taylor the greatest victories in the history of Mexico. The historians don’t hold the PED speculation against him because it’s just speculation albeit very strong. I also think Marquez gets a pass for it because of the strong Pacquiao suspicion as far PED use. I answered that as fair and objective as I could.
I was just looking at the ages of GGG and Kelly Pavlik. And they are the same exact age. Born the same year and same month. How in the hell did they miss each other? How is that GGG is still relevant and Pavlik is retired and who would’ve won in their primes?
Bread’s Response: Fun fact finding I see. Both of those big punchers are born in April my birthday month also. Aries Nation stand up lol.
They missed each other because Pavlik turned pro in 2000. GGG turned pro in 2006. 6 years is a very long time in boxing. By the time GGG won the title in 2010, Pavlik was losing his title the same year and he moved up to super middleweight. So neither guy ducked each other it was just one of those things where the fight was never really viable.
Pavlik took a little long to develop considering how many fights he needed to be ready for a title fight. They also made him fight a ridiculously tough eliminator vs Edison Miranda that many felt he would lose. So I say his prime started around 2007.
GGG who was a better amateur probably was prime ready somewhere around 2011ish. I think he still is in his prime actually but his peak looked to be around from where he fought Lajuan Simon through the Macklin and Rubio fights.
I know most people would take GGG because he seemed to peak higher and Pavlik is not as blue chippy. But let me tell you something, GGG’s style plays into Pavlik’s hands. Pavlik’s losses came against lots of slickery and movement. GGG would bring it to Pavlik. Pavlik had a jack hammer jab, a right hand that was as straight as an arrow and he was a real dog. His ko % was also similar to GGGs in his prime before guys started going the distance with him after he moved up.
This would have been a great fight in my opinion. A great fight. And although GGG’s peak lasted longer and he will go down as a better fighter. I am a huge Kelly Pavlik appreciator. That dude could fight. I can’t call this fight and I wouldn’t be surprised if Pavlik stopped him late. I will run this pass some oddsmaker friends I have.
Broner vs Garcia what a fight. PBC is killing it this year. I think Garcia blows right through him. What are your thoughts and breakdown?
Bread’s Response: This is a tremendous match up. I’m a huge Mikey Garcia fan. He’s a textbook fighter and the type of fighter you can tell a young student to imitate without screwing him up. Garcia has probably the best 1-2 in the game. Those are the first two punches most guys learn.
I don’t see Garcia blasting right through Broner though. Broner is a tough kid physically and he’s very prideful. I think he’s going to give it his all. He’s also used to getting hit by bigger guys than Garcia and let’s remember Garcia just moved up to 135 and now this fight will be at 140.
Broner was once an athletic prodigy on the lines of a young Zab Judah. He had speed, power, reflexes and just loads of natural talent. There are certain things that people can do that shows natural athleticism. The ability to do flips are one of them. I saw a video of Adrien Broner doing back summersaults. If you think about all of the kids you grew up with tell me one who could flip that was not athletic and had a daredevil attitude. Every fighter I have ever known that could flip was next level athletic.
From a physicality standpoint Broner has advantages over Garcia. The problem for Broner is this is a boxing match and skill, application and dedication play a big part also. Garcia has all of those things in abundance. And while Broner is more stylish I think Garcia actually boxes better and the name of this game is boxing.
Because of Broner’s outside of the ring trouble I can’t pick a winner right now. With Broner you have to see how his camps are going. But I do think it will be a tremendous fight. A fight that is fought in the mid range in long spots and a fight where we see Garcia actually box at times off the back foot as Broner tries to walk him down. Both guys will play multiple roles of boxer and tracker. It won’t be one guy attacking or retreating all night.
I know Danny Jacobs lost to GGG but how do you rate his performance and do you view him as the 2nd best middleweight in the world?
Bread’s Response: I give Jacobs an A for his performance. That is the best lost a fighter can take. Outperform expectations, go the distance and lose by controversial decision to a perceived great fighter. Jacobs was right there with GGG every step of the way and he fought the best fight I have ever seen him fight.
The 2nd best middleweight in the world…. Heck he could be the best. Let’s see how GGG performs vs Canelo. I’m not sure if I would pick GGG to defeat Jacobs again. Jacobs thought he belonged the 1st time, next time he knows he would belong.
Who is your pick for Hurd vs Trout? And how does Trout keep getting title shots without fighting eliminators?
Bread’s Response: You only have to fight eliminators for a title shot if you don’t get a voluntary shot at a title. If a champion elects to fight you without you being his mandatory then it’s called a voluntary defense. In Trout’s case he’s getting a shot at the title because Hurd agreed to fight him. In order to be eligible for a voluntary shot all you have to do is be ranked in the top 15 of the sanctioning body.
I’m actually picking Trout to beat Hurd. I don’t think Trout is going to keep losing these close decisions. Although he’s shorter I think he’s better from long range and I think he’s quicker. Hurd is big and strong and has a good uppercut but something tells me he’s looked spectacular because of the styles he has been fighting. I see another razor close distance fight but I think Trout will edge it this time around.
I’m curious to what the odds will be on this fight. I suspect Trout will be the underdog. This could be a good money grab. My only hesitation is Trout's 14 month layoff......
Send questions to [email protected]