The IBF has taken a lot of criticism over the years from those who follow boxing. This criticism is often over the organization’s poor choices of mandatory opponents and its willingness to strip undisputed, unified, or lineal champions for not facing those opponents. Those who have followed the sport long enough also know about the IBF’s problematic past. The organization was caught selling mandatory positions to the highest bidder a few decades ago. The IBF is also the root cause of the alphabet title issue - before the IBF convinced Larry Holmes to wear their belt, and make three titlists, boxing champions were almost always “undisputed.” The IBF is an easy target. The latest news, that Dmitry Bivol will likely get stripped of the belt, has reignited the criticism. But, I am here to stand up for the IBF. I hate all the alphabet titles but the IBF is clearly the best of a bad bunch. The reason the IBF always strips champions, and other groups don’t, is because the IBF actually makes everyone follow their rules. The IBF is willing to sacrifice a percentage of a massive purse to enforce its rules. None of the other bodies do that. The reason the IBF always has strange choices for mandatory contenders is because they cannot rank any of the other title holders, nor their “regular” champions, “interim” champions, “international” champions and “intercontinental” champions. The IBF also can’t rank “Diamond”, “Franchise”, “Gold” and “Silver” champions. It’s worth noting that the IBF only has one champion and an occasional interim champion. The IBF also cannot name anyone they want as a mandatory, as the other title belts do. They actually force two ranked contenders to fight each other to become a mandatory contender. Since their ranked contenders can’t include the eight or so boxers who have other random belts, we get Dubois, Einhart, Scull, Chukhadzhian, etc as mandatories. While the IBF isn’t perfect, boxing would be way better off if the other title belts held themselves to the same standards the IBF holds themselves, too. Do you agree with this take, or do you view the IBF as a major problem, like most of the boxing world does?
Bread’s response: I also appreciate the IBF because it’s the first major belt one of my fighters won. I think the IBF is solid is some aspects but here is what I would tweak. I think they should do away with their 10 -pound weigh in rule. There are too many fighters, managers and promoters who steer clear of them because it weakens fighters. If a fighter has a choice between winning a belt where they can drink and eat as much as they want after the weigh in, or having to monitor what they can eat and not go beyond the 10-pound limit until the next day, they are going to pick being able to eat and drink as much as they want. It’s simple. It’s practical.
I also believe the IBF should rank champions in other sanctioning bodies. There is no rule that I know of saying a champion can’t be ranked in another sanctioning body. Can you imagine champions being mandatories to fight other champions. That would be awesome and it would help boxing. If the IBF just tweaked those two things, their sanctioning body would flourish. On top of that, the IBF is only American-based sanctioning body. Think about that…
It was an interesting mailbag last week – it gave me ideas for a few questions to ask, I won’t send all of them at once! Regarding the British rules on weight cutting, I think I wrote you previously that I seemed to notice that British fighters don’t seem to be as good at cutting as much weight as American fighters, so often seem to look one or more weight divisions lower than them when they weigh in. It makes me wonder if it isn’t a difference in expertise/institutional knowledge so much as the different rules in the UK – in that, the fighters/teams maybe don’t get as accustomed to cutting as large of a weight than fighters elsewhere in the world. My question is related, what are the top rules you would say you are aware of and have to comply with as an insider that fans don’t realise or know about? I know most are probably aware of the IBF rehydration rules, I’m thinking maybe about specific things like how to get ranked, hand wrapping, or even a set time you have to be present in the arena by?
Bread’s response: I think UK fighters cut weight very well. I personally think the big difference in UK vs US fighters is the grass roots training. The American system just seems superior overall. It’s why big-name UK fighters seek out American trainers on a regular basis.
The top rules that the general public may not know, ok…
A fighter has to be ranked in the top 15 to get a title shot. A mandatory challenger does not have to sign a rematch clause. In Nevada you can put tape on the bare skin whereas in most other states you can’t use tape on the skin while wrapping hands. Fighters and their teams get report times to the arena. Most of the time that report time is approximately two-to-three hours before their bout.
Greetings Breadman, I hope all is well with you and yours my man. Just to weigh in on the Crawford-Canelo fight coming up: I have very mixed feelings. In some ways, this fight reminds me of Michael Spinks versus Larry Holmes, in that both boxers are elite with one (the naturally bigger man in both cases) showing enough decline that the smaller man is emboldened to attempt exploiting that slippage. I don’t see Crawford attempting this one right after Canelo broke Billy Joe Saunder’s face, for instance. In other ways, it reminds me of De La Hoya-Pacquiao (De La Hoya having lost a split decision against Floyd, followed by win over Stevie Forbes – not shot by any means but not the Oscar that gave Trinidad a boxing lesson and got robbed versus Mosley). However, Bud is older than Canelo, let alone the far younger and fresher Pac Man who was just 31 when stepping up to fight De La Hoya. Comparisons and analogies are fun, though far from scientific. The more I think about it, I go back to the old saying: a good big man beats a good small man every time. While I concede Bud has some advantages skills-wise, ring IQ and mindset are dead even. This is not Sugar Ray moving up against Donny Lalonde. Canelo is far better than Lalonde. This would be more like SRL stepping up against Michael Spinks or Evander Holyfield so I’m going to resist making too much of Bud being an inch taller or longer and keep it simple: He’s never been in the ring with a natural 168-pound fighter (Canelo’s familiar weight class) and I think he’s going to be in for a very rude awakening when Canelo starts connecting wherever he can – arms, shoulders, etc. I’m taking Canelo by mid-late stoppage, perhaps BoMac saving Crawford from himself, but what the hell do I know? We shall see! May the best man win! On another note, something I’ve been meaning to ask you about is this: We all feel terrible for Miguel Cotto perhaps being a victim of Margarito’s loaded wraps one fight before getting caught, as it obviously impacted Cotto and his career afterwards, despite being stellar, we’ll never know how good he might’ve been if that didn’t happen to him. But I’m surprised less people bring up Kermit Citron and his two brutal beatdowns at the hands of Margarito and what those beatings did to his career. I don’t think we can over-estimate the psychological impact of getting beaten into submission while not knowing their opponent might have been using illegal hand wraps. Of course, we don’t know if Margarito’s hands were illegally wrapped those nights, but go back and watch those fights, and it’s easy to speculate. I know Cintron started late with boxing, but was a very hot prospect, eventual world champion, and last I heard, opened a gym in Allentown where he doesn’t like discussing his professional career as a boxer. What’s your thoughts on that Bread? Emanuel Steward wouldn’t have taken Citron on if he wasn’t “the goods” and that’s in part why I think the poor guy might have been a victim of illegal hand wraps ruining and shortening his career. To his credit, I’ve never heard Citron speak about it but I think the rest of us should. It takes such immense courage to step in the ring and do what these guys do, they shouldn’t need to worry about being assaulted with anything deadlier than the two fists of the boxer in the opposite corner. Thanks again for all you do, my brother. Keep punching and Muharam Karim! Sean, Atlantic City
Bread’s response: Most people I know are taking Canelo. I understand why. But I wouldn’t analyze this fight and compare it to Ray Leonard fighting Holyfield or Spinks. Because Spinks and Holyfield are 6’2ish and Leonard is 5’9ish. If I wanted to make a comparison I would make the Leonard vs Hagler comparison. Hagler was still great, but he had slipped somewhat. Leonard was taller and more mobile. They weren’t as far apart in size as Leonard would have been to Spinks or Holyfield.
I think Cotto caught a tough break vs Maragarito. I don’t believe the first time Margarito used those knuckle pads were when he was caught using them vs Shane Mosley. However, I can’t say definitively that Margarito used them vs Cintron. It’s just too much to try to process. On top of that we would have to ask someone from Cintron’s team if they watched them wrap Margarito’s hands. I don’t want to go accusing someone of something, without facts to substantiate my claims.
What are your official picks for this big weekend of fights? I’m thinking of doing a parlay with Shakur and Berlanga, but I wanted to hear your thoughts first.
Bread’s response: I think Shakur is going to beat up Zepeda. I don’t know if he will stop him, but I believe he has a great chance to do so. I think the smaller ring will make Shakur prosper. He’s going to be more focused and determined and I believe he’s going to fight Zepeda in the pocket more than most expect.
I’ve gone back and forth with Sheeraz vs Berlanga. I really like Berlanga’s trainer, I can tell he’s the real deal. Berlanga is boxing better, and his jab is more prevalent. I can see that’s coaching. But I also believe that Sheeraz has a very good trainer in Andy Lee, although it does concern me that Sheeraz left Ricky Funez after his draw with Carlos Adames. I just don’t like to see that.
So, my reasoning for having a tough time picking this one is I respect that Berlanga went the distance with Canelo. But Berlanga’s expectations were so low going into the fight as far as the media, his goal post was just doing well and not getting stopped. It’s different when the expectations are to win. Berlanga can’t just not get stopped by Sheeraz and lose almost every round like he did vs Canelo. So Berlanga will have to put himself in harm’s way more. He’s also going to have to try harder moment for moment and we don’t know how his stamina is going 12 hard rounds, fighting hard the whole time. There is a difference between FIGHTING and fighting back. Because of this distinct difference, I believe Sheeraz is more equipped to fight hard down the stretch. He has better endurance muscles. He’s also scored multiple late stoppages. All of Berlanga’s stoppages have come in the first round and I believe one fighter made it to the sixth. So Sheeraz is more equipped to find success later in a fight. Because of this, I believe Sheeraz wins this fight by tko between eight and 11 but I will fully admit this is anyone’s fight and I believe both fighters have the ability to ko each other.
Have you been following the beef between Roy Jones and Floyd Mayweather? How do you think these things come about? It seems as if Roy picked against Floyd in a hypothetical fight against Sugar Ray Leonard and Floyd got offended. I would assume this happens more often than not. How can this be avoided? I hate seeing two of my favorite fighters going back and forth over a hypothetical match up that can never happen. Do you think it’s because they competed in the same era and could’ve possibly fought at a catch weight or is this more of Floyd not liking anyone picking a fighter to beat him?
Bread’s Response: First let me say this. There is no way Roy and Floyd could’ve ever fought. When Floyd turned pro at junior lightweight. Roy was a light heavyweight. There was literally zero chance they could’ve ever fought. Just because Floyd fought atjunior middleweight late in his career and Roy turned pro at junior middleweight in 1989, that doesn’t mean they could’ve fought. The boxing world has to be careful with that. Twenty years from now, some young analytical guy will say Roy or Floyd ducked one another.
As for their beef, I don’t really follow boxing interviews on the internet. I feel like the word content is being used to describe gossip. I feel like a lot of questions get asked to people in boxing to spark beefs, which will enhance traffic to the pages of whoever is interviewing them. However, I did hear what Roy said about a hypothetical matchup between Ray Leonard and Floyd Mayweather. I actually answered it last week. But I haven’t seen a response from Floyd.
If there is something going on because of Roy’s answer, I think it’s unfortunate. Roy and Floyd are the pioneers of the style of fighting we see today amongst urban fighters. As was Ray Leonard to their particular styles and Ali and Ray Robinson to his. They should all not just be respected but revered. I don’t like it when I see or hear a younger fighter say anything negative about any of them. I don’t indulge, I just take my attention away from whoever is saying it.
I hope Roy and Floyd don’t give social media the show they want. I hope they don’t get into insulting each other over the internet. We are in the era of DISRESPECT and ILLREGARD. These young people in this era simply love it. And if they see two legends do it, it would stamp their already bad behavior. I’m sure you may have been expecting another answer from me. But I don’t have a side in this. And I don’t even want to hear or see Roy and Floyd saying anything about each other. I respect greatness too much to indulge in that type of stuff.
Dear Mr. Edwards, This might be too late for the mailbag, but I saw your tweet about Jalen Hurts and it got me thinking. By the way, I'm a Ravens fan and agree with your sentiment. Can you think of any fighters who have gotten repeated cracks at elite/pound for pound opponents because the public/industry perception was they deserved the opportunity "on paper" and would eventually break through? Could be marketability, could be an over inflated eye test.
Bread’s response: Rocky Suarez comes to mind. I thought he was a terrific fighter. He got some tough title shots. Some tough big fights vs great fighters. He always showed up and fought his butt off but never really broke through in the big one.
As for Jalen Hurts. The media is very covert in their agenda they try to push. You see multiple media figures disrespecting Hurts because he won a Super Bowl with a talented team. The Eagles are super talented I admit but you still need to execute and win. The Eagles were the underdog in the Super Bowl by the way. Hurts went to the Superbowl a couple of years ago and he outplayed Patrick Mahomes and he didn’t have as talented as a team as he has now. He still did his thing and if it weren’t for a bad call, he would be a two-time Super Bowl champion.
The Ravens and the Lions have just as many All Pros and Pro Bowlers as the Eagles. The Bills have been stacked for the last few years. Why didn’t they win or even go to the Super Bowl? While Hurts should be celebrated for being at his best when he was best needed. He’s being minimized by the media and turned into a glorified Trent Dilfer level QB and I don’t like it. By the way, no disrespect to Trent Dilfer.
Hey BreadmanHope you’re keeping well. Always enjoyed the mailbag and seen you more on YouTube the last couple of years. Anyway, I’ve just seen a clip where Ali said Marciano might be favorite to beat him due to being a better version of Frazier. How do you see that fight? And for fun:Liston v Marciano; Frazier v Marciano; Foreman v Marciano; Ali v Walcott; Ali v Louis; Ali v Moore. I’ve not seen the last three since the boxer series magazine from about 20 years ago, did you enjoy those magazines? All the best,Damien.
Bread’s response: Yes I remember the segment and I really liked it. I think Liston would have beaten Marciano but I’m not sure of it. In my experience in boxing and athletes in general, there are athletes who’s sum-total outweigh their parts. With those type of athletes they may not match up well in hypothetical match ups but actual head-to-head match ups they usually win. For example, if we ask who wins Carl Froch vs Lucian Bute on paper, we say Bute. But when they actually fought, Froch crushed him. Marciano didn’t know how to lose and that matters. But on paper I would take Liston.
I disagree with Ali on this. I think Frazier is too big and fast for Marciano in a chest-to-chest battle. And Marciano’s window for success is a late round surge. But Frazier is just as good late as Marciano. I’m comfortable picking Frazier to beat him.
Marciano can’t beat Foreman.
Ali vs Walcott is interesting. I would take Ali. I believe he’s too long and sharp. But Doug Jones gave a pre-title Ali all he could handle. And Walcott is as good or better than Jones with similar qualities.
Ali vs Louis is a fight that was talked about in my home as a youth more than any other hypothetical match up by far. My grandfather used to always say Ali wins the first one. But Louis makes an innate adjustment and wins the rematch. So today, I will honor my pops…
Archie Moore is a little too small and shelled up to beat someone with Ali’s feet and length.
Appreciate you Breadman and the time you take to respond to all the questions! Expert’s choice: what is an insight, preference, opinion, bit of wisdom, etc that maybe you don’t get asked about often or haven’t been asked about recently or just want the chance to expand on here? Looking forward to the mailbag! Sincerely, Alex S.
Bread’s response: You know I wished people would ask me more about how much the favor and preference of the promoters can affect a career. It really does matter. You see some fighters getting good opportunities. And you see equal or better fighters getting hard, unlikely opportunities. I won’t give examples but it does sicken me sometimes when I have the fighter who is being slighted.
I also wish I was asked more about fighter/trainer dynamics. There is so much disrespect that is dished out these days to trainers, from slighted pay, to talking back, to no job security, etc. You guys wouldn’t believe some of the stuff that trainers go through. But all you have to do is watch the fights. When a fighter does his post-fight interviews, he shows you how much he values his trainers. In the moment of emotion after winning a big fight. The fighter usually thanks a manager and promoter. He shouts out his kids and significant other. And usually never brings up the person who was with more time hour for hour in the gym than anyone. His trainer. Just observe closely.
How do you see Katie Taylor vs Amanda Serrano this time? I feel like Serrano won at least one or both of their fights and that she’s going win again.
Bread’s response: Both fights were razor close but I was comfortable with both decisions going to Taylor. I will admit that Taylor's look of distress does make it seem like she’s getting the worst of the action. But punch for punch I feel like she may be edging it. When elite amateur level fighters, face elite hard-nosed fighters, the elite amateur type usually have the advantage in terms of scoring points. Let’s look at Taylor vs Chavez, Leonard vs Hagler and Oscar vs Tito.
Taylor, Leonard, and Oscar are all Gold Medalist. Chavez, Hagler, and Tito are the hardnosed greats. No matter what you feel about the final decisions. You have to admit that Chavez, Hagler and Tito had a hard time as far as points being scored against them. I feel like this is why Serrano seems a step behind. She doesn’t process fast enough mentally as far as scoring points. She also is making the same fundamental mistake over and over. I won’t get into that but it’s a big issue. Serrano can win but she will most likely have to hurt Taylor or drop her to show that her work is being more effective.
It’s hard to make a prediction on this because I feel like it’s very hard to win three close decisions against an elite fighter in that fighter’s hometown. So, I just don’t know if Taylor can win this fight. Judges are human and everyone knows it’s 2-0 Taylor. But all in all, I expect another great close fight. I’m curious to see if Serrano and her team picked up on what Taylor is doing when Serrano puts her against the ropes.
Send Questions & Comments to dabreadman25@hotmail.com
