Coach Stephen “Breadman” Edwards, ahead of a busy weekend where he will be guiding Caleb Plant and Kyrone Davis in big fights in Las Vegas, answers your questions and assesses your assertions in his latest mailbag
Hello Breadman, a couple of weeks ago I raised the issue of safety-first boxers and how I believe they are damaging for the future health of sport. As a trainer who cares for the future health of his fighters, I can appreciate I hit a raw nerve. Now just after my last e-mail boxing saw one of its worst weekends where the paying public felt really let down with boring fights where the higher profile fighters were paid big money involving Canelo, Haney, Lopez and surprisingly Garcia. That weekend of fights was saved by Naoya Inoue’s brave and gutsy performance. I believe that's what the majority of the fans pay to see, and what's amusing here is Inoue was probably paid the least and put on the best value for money performance for the fans. I believe the Inoue card was a free to air event in the USA, please correct me if I'm wrong. I am pleased that it looks like the promoters have finally woken up to the problem the sport faces with the likes of too many defensive first fighters. (From boxing news 24) De La Hoya summed it up perfectly: “Devin actually lost in winning [against Jose Ramirez on May 2nd]. His stock is super down,” said Oscar. “People are talking about him just being a runner, not a boxer. This guy [Haney] is a runner. Why would I want to see that?”
An extract from another article from the same website: What Bill has to hope for is Turki Alalshikh coming to Devin’s rescue and offering one of those fighters a ton of money to fight Dev. I don’t know if he will after Haney’s safety-first performance against Ramirez on the Times Square card in New York City on May 2nd. Turki needs fighters who entertain, create positive reactions from fans, and make them want to purchase future events on PPV. If the idea is to save boxing, Turki has to steer away from including boring fighters on his cards and focus more on the ones that create excitement. Haney, Shakur, and Richardson Hitchins don’t entertain. I very much agree with the sentiment of DLH and the writers of the boxing news 24 article. If the sport of professional boxing is to survive and thrive, I believe there needs to be more focus on providing entertaining fights to earn the big dollars and not demanding the big dollars because you think you are the best. A fighter can claim he's the best, but there is no obligation of fans to pay to watch them or for promoters to lose money staging their fights. Bob Arum has made comments that I found understanding and pleasing. Ex-fighter Tim Bradley's passionate outburst after the New York card snoozefest was another good example of this issue of entertaining to earn your big dollars needs to be addressed. I honestly hope Turki follows the advice given in the last extract, if he doesn't the fighters shouldn't be surprised if he exits the sport as quickly as he arrived. I'd like your thoughts on the matter without resorting to labeling me as just being upset that Haney and Hitchins beat Australian fighters. My concerns for the future of the sport run much deeper than patriotic opinions. Sincerely Daz from Down Under
Bread’s response: I’m not sure which email you sent me but you can’t strike a nerve with me. I most likely thought you were a foolish person who didn’t understand boxing with my reply. I spoke out openly about how bad William Scull performed. That to me was “running”. But a fighter who decides to box and apply defense and use his legs, while still scoring points is not a fighter that I will criticize or in my opinion deserves criticism.
Are you the person I asked if they would want their son to be taught to fight like Arturo Gatti or Floyd Mayweather? If you are, you didn’t answer me in your reply. And if you aren’t, could you please answer me the next time you write in.
You don’t even realize how ridiculous you sound. “Safety first fighters are ruining the health of the sport.” That sounds stupid! Because fighters are the lifeline of the sport. And the more defense you use, the longer your career will be. So if elite fighters have more longevity, then the sport prospers.
If referees start warning fighters for not punching and taking away points, I wouldn’t have an issue with that. I like watching KOs. We would all have to abide by the laws of the land.
If you or anyone else who doesn’t like safety first fighters and chose to not support them, I wouldn’t have an issue with that either. That’s fair action.
But this complaining and indirect attacks on specific fighters is what is ruining boxing. Let’s just be honest, you’re mostly talking about a certain race of fighters. That’s the elephant in the room. Again William Scull RAN and I personally don’t ever want to see him fight again. But each time this specific race or ethnic group of fighters boxes and uses their feet, I keep hearing the word “running”.
Shakur Stevenson is a fighter who in this era, consistently gets accused of running. There has been a few of his fights where he moved more than I thought he had too. But for the most part, he’s not a runner. He just applies defense before he applies offense. I just watched his fight with Oscar Valdez. He outboxed Valdez. I don’t consider that running.
Devin Haney didn’t open up vs Jose Ramirez. I have no issue saying that Haney was very conservative with his offense. But Ramirez performed poorly and barely won a round and the criticism has been one-way towards Haney. Ramirez had a fighter in Haney who was just dropped three times in his last fight and who was trying to get his footing back in a comeback fight. Haney doesn’t appear to have his confidence all the way back. Ramirez could’ve attacked in a more frenetic and violent way. But he didn’t. Why?
You guys constantly state how Devin has no chin and can’t punch. Well ok, then attack him and make him fight so his lack of chin and lack of punch can be exposed. Ramirez didn’t do that. I keep getting emails about Haney because I said, he may need a couple of fights to get his confidence back after being dropped and hurt several times by Ryan and I don't want to judge him on one performance.....That's all I said.
I’m not a Teofimo Lopez fan because of some of his out of the ring comments. But I do recognize he’s an elite talent. Lopez didn’t run. He outboxed Arnold Barboza. If you think that was boring then, watch Tim Tszyu get stopped again, applying no defense.
Ask Tim Tszyu should he be more defensive, if you take exception to what I said. I’m a Tszyu fan by the way. I think he’s the goods. But he’s in love with his offense and he paid for it. He was knocked out brutally, he lost his title and he lost some brain cells. It’s nothing cool about that. I’m sure if Tszyu could do it again, he would change his strategy somewhat and apply more defense with his offense.
The real reason why this criticism is surfacing, is because your favorite fighters can’t figure out a way to knockout and stop fighters that move. Artur Beterbiev and David Benavidez handle movers pretty good. Their fans don’t complain because they score stoppages over movers. But the fans of other guys who aren’t as skilled at fighting movers, complain.
Boxing is a professional sport that generates money because of fan interest. If the fans don’t support fighters that apply defense, then those fighters will become extinct or they will change their styles. But the false labelling and overstatements are getting old. There is a difference between boxing and running and you need to learn that fundamental difference. A runner is one who tries to survive by over-moving and running out the clock, hence the term “runner”. The runner only wants to go the distance and he rarely executes any offensive attacks. A boxer is one who applies offense and defense simultaneously. He attempts to score points but he’s not willing to disregard his defense.
To give you a clear example. Guillermo Rigondeaux is a boxer. William Scull is a runner. Pernell Whitaker was a boxer. Hector Camacho post Edwin Rosario was somewhat of a runner. Learn the difference.
And please don’t tell me what another website said. Be specific with an author of the article so I can fact check and research.
As for Oscar De La Hoya. I respect him. He was an awesome fighter. But now he’s a promoter. He’s going to say certain things that support his company and brand. Devin Haney is a rival of one of his fighters Ryan Garcia, Devin has also fought other Golden Boy fighters. If Devin Haney hurt himself by winning against Jose Ramirez. What did Ryan Garcia do when he lost and got outboxed by Rolly Romero? Seriously, you need to consider context before you write in trying to make a point.
In the main event of the evening Ryan Garcia was a huge favorite to not only beat Rolly Romero, but to stop Rolly Romero. Not only did Garcia lose. But he got outboxed by a fighter who is viewed as a fighter with crude boxing skills. Ryan’s performance was awful. Not only that, it’s his first performance after testing positive for PEDs. Ryan’s loss has taken the luster off of the scheduled Haney rematch. So while Haney certainly didn’t set the world on fire with his performance, Garcia’s performance was worse. Garcia was dropped and outboxed by Rolly Romero. At least Devin won.
Oscar De La Hoya thought he was robbed against Felix Trinidad. I am a Tito fan, and I thought Oscar won that fight. But Oscar was accused of “running” the last few rounds. Oscar thought he was “boxing”…. Regardless of what your interpretation is, Oscar chose to move and use his legs vs a vicious puncher who was coming down hill. He chose to execute that style. The question is why. The answer is simple. Because Tito punched hard as hell and Oscar chose to fight a style that didn’t allow him to get hurt or stopped late. And I totally understand it. But my point is, you can see how the goalposts get moved according to whatever narrative is trying to get pushed. We all have to be careful.
In the grand scheme of professional boxing, fighters definitely need to entertain the casual fans but that shouldn’t come at the expense of WINNING. There needs to be a fair and practical balance.
Hi Breadman, Just following on from your responses to my Loma post. In my opinion, Loma's current standing suffers as people compare him now to his glorious peak, which may be the highest I've ever seen, rather than looking at him now in isolation. To clarify on my Pacquiao and Floyd comments, I didn't mean to say he is/was better than them at this stage, in my opinion his drop off is no more so than theirs. In response to who I would omit from the current p4p list in favour of Loma, looking at the ring rankings, Loma's last two performances are higher in my opinion than anything Teraji, and certainly Canelo have shown in recent times, possibly Nakatani too. I would have full confidence he beats all of them comfortably at this moment if they were the same size. This is of course subjective, but this is what I see. I just finished watching the Taylor fight, and unfortunately, his flaws have magnified in recent times. I couldn't help seeing Amir Khan, without the glass jaw, while I was watching him, in that his timing and ring generalship are seriously lacking.
Bread’s response: I love Loma. I think he’s historically underrated. But you’re going too far if you think he belongs on the current P4P list. It’s just not feasible. He beat George Kambosos in an excellent performance to win the title again but he didn’t beat HOF Benny Leonard. And he hasn’t fought in over a year. Had Loma avenged one of his losses to Haney or Lopez, I could see putting him on the P4P list. But no credible analyst would put him on the list right now after a Kambosos win and being off for a year. The P4P list is not a lifetime achievement award. It’s who the best is currently.
I was very big on Josh Taylor. I predicted he would be a P4P fighter and a champion when he barely had double digit fights. But something about Taylor always bothered me. He never evolved to the point where he could execute in a smooth way, without going balls to the wall and still having success. Basically Taylor always seemed stressed out in the ring. He always seemed neurotic. He seems like a high strung person in general that doesn’t settle himself well. Fighters like that, for the most part, don’t have longevity. Taylor was an elite fighter in his prime. But once things drop off slightly for fighters like Taylor, in a game of inches. The same decision they used to win 115-113, they start losing 113-115. Smooth even-tempered fighters for the most part, extend their primes. Not high-strung ones. Again there are outliers but this is the norm.
G'day Bread, Lenny here from Melb Australia. I really enjoy reading your weekly mailbag, great job. A couple of questions, Justis Huni has recently been announced as the new opponent for Fabio Wardley, I was just wondering what your thoughts were on this match-up? Personally I think Huni has really improved as a fighter, he's always possessed great handspeed for a heavyweight but now he's sitting down on his punches more, would you agree with this observation also? Also just a question regarding my fav Aussie fighter Jai Opetaia, it's frustrating to watch him not get the smoke with the other cruiserweight title holders, do you think Ramirez and co are avoiding him, or is it just circumstantial at the moment? What is your opinion on Jai as top-level cruiserweight? Thanks for your answers, Bread, cheers Lenny. Kind Regards, Leonard Russo
Bread’s response: I’m not familiar enough with Huni to give my thoughts on the match up. But I do know Jai Opetaia. I like him a lot. He can go! I think he’s the best cruiserweight in the world and I would love for him to fight Gilberto Ramirez. That’s an excellent match up. I’m not sure why it’s not getting talked about more. Hopefully Opetaia can get an opportunity to unify.
Hello, Alvarez seems to get a lot of support in regards to him being allowed to fight whoever he wishes due to his past work. I find this as an insult to past greats who never took this path. With so many good opponents around like Benavidez, Morrell, Mbilli, Hernandez, Iglesias around he’s fighting Crawford after saying for so long he’d never fight Bud. I lost respect for Alvarez when he refused a unification @ 160 with Andrade. Now at 168 I can’t stand the way he’s operating. Apparently boxing is all about business now. I find that as weak excuse for avoiding the better boxers. Sure Alvarez will enter the IBHOF for his early work but he’ll never be a great as far as I’m concerned and that’s not even mentioning steroids. Yeah I get it. If you use steriods against Alvarez then the IBHOF would be a lot less full. I’m sorry, but I’m old school growing up watching boxing in the 70s. Can you tell me which former p4p boxers stopped fighting the best available instead of doing the business approach?
Bread’s response: I’m a big Canelo supporter. I think his resume is excellent. He took on some tough styles that he didn’t have to take on. Austin Trout, Floyd Mayweather and Erislandy Lara are tough fights for a 23yr old fighter, who had slow feet. Yet he took the smoke. So I always gave him props for those fights. If you know, you know.
But recently David Benavidez emerged in his division and wanted smoke. Benavidez did his part by beating top contenders in an exciting fashion. The fight was never made. At this point the only way to look at it is a duck. Canelo is still a great fighter. He’s still a HOF. But not fighting Benavidez is a duck. It’s no other way to look at it at this point. I don’t kill Canelo’s legacy because of it. I don’t even think Canelo is scared of Benavidez. I just think Canelo is older and he doesn’t feel like fighting a younger, bigger, killer, with that type of workrate. He knows he’s going to have to go to the darkest of all dark places to win that fight. He knows he likely will leave a piece of himself in the ring. And sometimes a person just doesn’t feel like all of that. This is not an excuse, it’s just my candid observation. It is, what it is. I’m not sure what else there is to be said about it.
Sometimes I think you guys want me to burn a fighter at the stake with criticism. But I'm not into all of that. When it's time to forensically analyze careers and Canelo is being compared to a fighter close in stature, the fact that Canelo didn't fight Benavidez will be considered. History will determine where he is. Let's see how it goes...
Greetings Mr Edwards! Hope everything is good with you and your family.Have a safe and blessed training camp with Caleb Plant and good-luck with the preparations and fight. Thank you for the mailbag it has helped us a-lot in how we view boxing and life in genaral. Today I want to ask you about the boxing scoring system! Do you think fights must be scored round by round and rated out of 10 as they’re scored? My question is based on how a fighter wins a fight and how casual boxing fans and the media rates fights, for example Lomachenko outlanded Haney in their fight when we talk about punches thrown and landed but Haney was able to win some rounds with less punch output and ring generalship. If a fighter is just in the fight without engaging and trying to survive is given a nine for instance, Scull against Canelo, which I believe it’s unfair scoring. Only a fighter gets an 8 or less if he’s knocked down or counted upon. Is there a better way to score a fight, that can be used in boxing? I personally think of feel like a boxer can be beaten by won with punches landed and output but with good understanding of the scoring it’s a matter of winning rounds rather than beating the person up? Can I have your view on this and if you have any past fights that may ring the bell when it comes to this system. Mine are Loma vs Haney and Mayweather vs Maidana 1.What’s next for Josh Taylor after his latest lost to Essuman?I have learnt that Canelo has went to Philly to try and spar Boots in preparation for the Crawford fight according to Fulton. That’s a great approach by Team Canelo if it's true but still I believe Crawford will be too much for him at this point. What are your views on the July 19 fights? Blessings Mneli from Eswatini
Bread’s response: I don’t get into how fights should be scored. I get into how fights are supposed to be scored. We can’t change the rules to our subjective preference. There is a 10 point must system. Fights are scored based on this criterion. Clean punching is paramount. That’s an obvious explanation. Effective aggressiveness. Effective is the key word. So you can’t just come forward and miss and take punches. In order for your aggressiveness to be considered effective, you have to be landing the lost punches and defending them. Ring generalship is harder to explain. It’s the fighter who is controlling what is going on. It doesn’t matter if they’re going forward or backwards. Defense is supposed to be part of the scoring system but everyone forgets it. Defense is simple. The fighter who is avoiding being hit the most is applying the best defense. And the layman’s term for how to score a fight. Is “who would you rather be?” Whoever you would rather be, should win the round.
Scoring should be done by scoring each round individually with no carry over effect. That’s tough because most times when a fighter wins a big round, he gets credit for the following rounds until the energy of the big round wears off. I hope I was able to help. It’s not about how I think fights should be scored. It’s about how fights should be scored. Take out what you want and score in relation to the rules that are in place.
Haney vs Loma and Mayweather vs Maidana were all very close fights. Loma and Maidana had serious cases for winning and at the end of each of fight I couldn't tell definitely who won. I don’t like to rescore fights because the close rounds are tainted by narratives. I like to go by my initial impression. My initial impression was Draw or Loma and Draw or Maidana and this is without a pen or pad just a guess before the scorecards were announced. But I don’t view the outcomes as injustices or robberies because of the tight swing rounds.
I saw a post on IG where it was asked what is the best region as far as producing fighters. You clearly stated Philly. I’m not saying I disagree with you but New York has Mike Tyson and Sugar Ray Robinson. Who does Philly have that compare to that?
Bread’s response: You are disagreeing with me but it’s in a passive way. But it’s not a problem. That’s what mailbags are for. I remember the IG post. It was this week. I said Philadelphia produces the best fighters as a whole and I stand on it. Here is my reasonable explanation.
I believe the post asked in recent times over the last twenty-five years for context. Since 2000, Bernard Hopkins, David Reid, Danny Garcia, Julian Williams, Tevin Farmer, Stephen Fulton and Jaron Ennis all became world champions. Gabe Rosado, Bryant Jennings, Teon Kennedy, Hank Lundy, Mike Jones, Eric Harding and Jesse Hart have all fought for world championships. That’s just since 2000.
New York has four times the amount of people that Philadelphia does. That matters. Because there is a larger number of people to pick from, New York should have more world champions than any other city in the country. But they don’t. Since 2000, I only remember Danny Jacobs, Zab Judah and Paulie Malignaggi being world champions. If you want to count Teofimo Lopez and Peter Quillin you can and it still wouldn’t be more than Philadelphia. To be totally honest it’s not even close enough to debate. Oxnard, LA and the DMV area have a better argument than New York.
I love Sugar Ray Robinson. He’s the best fighter ever. And I love Mike Tyson, he was the phenom of my lifetime as far as young heavyweight fighters. But Robinson fought in the 1940s and Tyson the 1980s. If you have to go back that far to make a point, then you know your point is not of strong substance. Often times Philadelphia, which is a city, gets compared to regions and states. If the comparisons were of just of specific cities, Philly would blow mostly everyone out. If I included the state of Pennsylvania, the blowout would be so brutal it wouldn’t even be fair. Larry Holmes is from Easton, Pa which is close to Philly. Paul Spadafora, Billy Conn and Charley Burley are from the Pittsburgh area. Harry Greb who some historians say is the best ever, is also from Pittsburgh. I think we should stop these debates. Let’s debate something that is close. We can’t debate a runaway victory. There has never been a place in the United States of America, that produced the quality fighters, including amateurs, contenders and world champions that Philadelphia has.
Hey Bread, hope you're doing well. Last week you answered a Haney fan regarding the hate he gets from fans and you said he doesn't deserve it. Is it really that hard to fathom why Haney is hated? In my opinion quite a lot of US boxers have become divas and so fans have turned to European, Caucasian and Asian boxers who may lack trash talking skills but walk the walk. Let me elaborate Haney's negatives: 1. Has mostly build up his resume on old fighters. 2. Got a questionable decision against Loma who's a fan favorite. 3. Didn't fight Shakur or Tank or any other names at 135. 4. Hasn't fought Teo at 140 and relinquished his belt when given a mandatory challenger. 5. Boring style. I don't mind defensive fighters, Shakur and Bivol are fun to watch, but Haney doesn't even have defensive flair. 6. Acts like Mayweather 2.0 without anything to back it up. 7. Obnoxious father for promoter. 8. No persona to capitalise on. 9. Dude doesn't even have a promoter and I doubt Turki would want him on future cards after that Ramirez performance. No offense to you if you're close to him but objectively speaking he has nothing going for him and he acts like a diva. At least Tank is in fun fights and Ryan has a clown act. Haney is neither a box office guy nor has any warrior mentality and yet he acts entitled. Boxing doesn't need these type of guys as the headliners if it wants to stay relevant. The least he can do is fight all comers, collect belts and unify divisions but no he's not even 30 and he's already cherry picking in his career. Is he the worse guy in boxing, no. Recently Canelo, Tank and the Charlo brothers are perhaps more worthy of the abuse. But the hate against him is justified unless he corrects his course.
Bread’s response: You know what, I think you were a little harsh but I respect your perspective. Your email was well thought out and you made some respectable points. But I think you’re being slightly too hard on Devin. You’re overlooking the fact that he did fight Loma and Ryan. Regardless of the outcomes, he took two tough fights and he didn’t wait them out. The fans love when prime elite talents fight. If we are going to criticize him for who he didn’t fight, we have to give him credit for he did fight. As of now, out of the big names, he’s the only one to fight both Ryan and Loma.
As for being close to Devin, I’m not. I’ve only met him a couple of times in passing. Sometimes you guys make assumptions when I’m not harsh towards a fighter that it means I’m close to them. I will tell you this, I’m cool with plenty of fighters. But there are less than a handful of fighters that I am “close” to, that I don’t train. When I take up for Inoue, Pacman or Loma, how come you don’t ask me if I’m close to them?
Hey Breadman —Thanks for the thoughtful response last week. The examples of fighters who allow themselves to get touched with certain shots—but not the kill shot—were great to go back and watch with fresh eyes. This week I’ve got a quick set of questions around tempo, decision-making, and a slightly provocative one about the GOAT of combat sports:
1. In a matchup between two counterpunchers—like a potential Shakur vs. Tank—what usually determines who controls the rhythm and who ends up reacting? On paper, it feels like both guys want to draw the other in.
2. Have you ever seen a fight where a boxer ignoring their corner mid-fight turned out to be the right move? How do great fighters know when to trust their own read instead of their trainer’s voice?
3. Curious to get your take on this: Could Holly Holm be in the conversation for GOAT of combat sports—male or female? In boxing, she was a multiple-time world champ with 18 title defenses across three weight classes (33-2-3 overall). In MMA, she knocked out the boogeywoman of that era—Ronda Rousey—to win the UFC bantamweight title. And she started her career by winning a national amateur title in kickboxing. That’s three different combat sports with high-level accomplishments. I honestly can’t think of a parallel resume across boxing, MMA, and kickboxing. What do you think?
Appreciate all the insight and breakdowns every week. No one breaks the game down like you do—Tommy, Europe
Bread’s response: In a matchup of counter punchers, the one who can score with his jab the most usually has the advantage. Watch Leonard vs Benitez, Whitaker vs McGirt and Mayweather vs Marquez. The counter puncher who had the more controlling jab won the fight. Tank would have his work cut out for him vs Shakur because of the stylistic advantage Shakur has.
I don’t like when a fighter disregards his trainer’s advice. As a trainer that strikes a nerve to me. But I’m sure it happens often. Off the top of my head Ali disregarded his corner’s advice vs George Foreman and he stayed on the ropes and pot shotted Foreman. Obviously I’m talking about the Rope A Dope. But Ali is one of one. And it worked that fight, but it also haunted him in other fights, like the Spinks fight. I have a saying. If you listen to your trainer, then he’s in the ring with you. If you don’t listen to your trainer and your opponent is listening to his trainer, then you’re fighting two people by yourself.
I don’t know enough about Holly’s career to answer you accurately. I am a boxing purist and I don’t watch other combat sports too often.
Josh Taylor is currently 19-3. Some would argue his record should be worse than that. His best wins have not aged well. He looks shot, so it’s hard to imagine his resume improving. In the era with eight weight classes and one belt in each weight class, I don’t think a fighter like Josh Taylor would have ever been a ranked contender. Yet Taylor is a former undisputed champion. There aren’t even a dozen fighters in the four-belt era who have accomplished that. Almost every other undisputed champion from this era is certain to make the hall of fame. How do we balance this? How will we remember Josh Taylor? Is he a former undisputed champion, and therefore great? Or, is he just not that good, despite the fact that he won an undisputed championship? Thank you!
Bread’s response: You’re pretty much writing a eulogy for Josh Taylor. Ok, let’s see. I think Taylor was an excellent fighter who just didn’t have a long prime. He was one of the better junior welterweights of the decade. He’s one of the best fighters Scotland has produced. He wasn’t a great fighter, but he was elite in his era and he unified. That’s a big deal. I don’t think he’s a Hall of Famer if he retired tomorrow, but I do think he had a career to be proud of. He always fought hard and he took on tough smoke. Everyone is not going to be an all time great. We have to respect what a fighter did, and not always focus on what they did not do. Josh Taylor had an excellent career.
Hey Breadman, Thank you for all you do with the Saturday morning mailbag. I was watching some older fights and I remember that some of the top champions would participate in non-title fights to stay active and I'm wondering why they got away from this. Do you think that champs now would benefit from this? They would get one or two extra paydays a year while keeping busy and still keep their titles regardless of the outcome plus it could give them the added exposure to the average sports fan. What do you think? Keep punching, David
Bread’s response: I think the champs would benefit from non-title fights. But there are four issues that prevent that in this era. One is PED use. Don’t think for one minute that’s not a big deal. Fighters are cycling off in between these long layoffs and if they fought more often, then they may be asked to test more often…
The other issue is hard weight cuts. 90% of the top fighters in this era are cutting 25lbs or more. It’s not just physically draining it’s emotionally draining. And cutting 25lbs, four times per year, instead of every eight or nine months is much harder.
Third, the fighters are spoiled in this era. They would rather make one million dollars in one night and get an eight-month vacation. Than to fight every other month even if the total is more than one million. They have more free time.
And the most important aspect is, who’s going to invest in these non-title fights. Make no mistake, the network platform is the real promoter in this era. And someone has to pay for these non-title fights.
Send Questions and comments to dabreadman25@hotmail.com