Daily Bread Mailbag: Joshua-Pulev, Spence-Crawford, Danny Garcia

The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards tackling topics such as the career and legacy of Danny Garcia, Anthony Joshua vs. Kubrat Pulev,  Errol Spence vs. Terence Crawford, and more.

What's goin' on Brother Bread,

Hope all is well with you and yours in these trying times.

Well, we finally got to see a fight that is actually consequential in power rankings of the welterweight division and after seeing the fight, I must say that Errol Spence surprised the hell out of me.

I thought that Danny Garcia was a live fighter and would push Spence, who had been inactive for a year and had been in a horrific car accident that did cause some damage. Boy was I wrong.

What I want to know is, how much of this is good Spence and how much of this is bad Garcia?

I thought Spence looked amazingly sharp for a fighter who'd been inactive and showed very little signs of ring rust until the later rounds, when his gas tank started to run out, but what happened to your Philly homeboy Garcia? His feet looked like they were stuck in cement and he once again started to come to life when it was too late and his opponent had an almost insurmountable lead.

Is this just what Danny Garcia is at WW, a gatekeeper for elite talents, or is there still a chance for him to be special?

I know you don't like to criticize other trainers, but do you think that Angel has taken him as far as he could go and stunted his growth in some capacity?

Did you with your trained eye see any difference in Spence in this fight versus before the accident?

Secondly, It's just generally accepted that Joe Frazier is an all-time great heavyweight, but as somebody who was born years, after his last fight, I look at his record, and I don't see evidence of that.

I see a victory over a past his peak Muhammad Ali who had been exiled from boxing for 3 years, and once Ali was somewhat active again, he lost their next two fights. I see George Foreman, who a past his prime Ali beat absolutely demolish Frazier twice, and he only fought 37 times in his career and by his late 20s was past his best.

What am I missing?
MMs
Floyd Mayweather Jr./Tito Trinidad (147)
Floyd Mayweather Jr./Oscar De La Hoya (prime against Tito)
Floyd Mayweather Jr./Emile Griffith (147)
Floyd Mayweather Jr./Wilfred Benitez (147)

Bread’s Response: I also thought Danny was live. I think he was ready to fight and he was locked in. But Errol fought a really good fight. His jab was pumping. His sense of awareness was really high. And he was accurate.

Danny is not a super athlete. So he fights in a confined form. And he doesn’t have active or fast feet. He boxes better with his hands than he does his feet. It’s just what it is.

I won’t criticize Angel because sometimes adding something takes something away. Danny may not be the great counter puncher he is if he had more active feet. Danny’s style is aligned with his physical traits. Maybe Danny would get clipped if he opened up more. I’m not saying it’s not a FLAW. It definitely is. He lost 3 fights pretty much the same way. But what I am saying is maybe he wouldn’t be as good overall if he had more active feet because that could take away from something in another area. You would be surprised how that works in an athlete.

I heard Angel’s instructions. He was telling Danny to back a southpaw up. Let your hands go. And to be more busy. Errol just didn’t let him do what Angel asked him to do. Now what they worked on in camp I don’t know. But his instructions were solid.

I don’t think Danny is a GATEKEEPER. That’s a strong word. I think he’s a solid contender. Top 10 in the RING Magazine. He’s only lost to the best.

I thought Spence looked excellent. I don’t want to pick him apart. Danny is a strong, tricky fighter. It’s hard to steam roll him. Errol did have a weird reaction to Danny’s right hand body shot. I don’t know what that was but it seemed to affect him more than the announcers realized. And he did get visually fatigued. But that’s common in a tough fight. Spence was working. Maybe he also had some anxiety. He is human. He didn’t seem to rehydrate too high in the ring, Danny seemed bigger in the ring. But it’s hard to say I didn’t see the dressing room weights.

Overall I give Spence a B+. That was a really good performance. No fighter will be lights out in every single fight. But if you’re great, you’re baseline average should be good enough to beat just about everybody. Errol was fine and will be better in his next fight.

You’re missing a lot when it comes to Joe Frazier. First of all he was Gold Medalist in the 1964 Olympics. In Frazier’s 12th pro fight he took on a seasoned top 10 Ring level guy in Oscar Bonavena. From that point in 1966 up until he beat Muhammad Ali in 1971, he had one of the better runs in division history relative to era.  After the Bonavena fight, he beat Eddie Machen, Doug Jones and George Chuvalo. All top 10 excellent fighters OF that era. I say “OF” that era because if you don’t know the era, you may think they were Cannon Fodder. But they weren’t.

At 19-0 Frazier then takes on 23-0 Buster Mathis for the NYSC Heavyweight title. He stops Mathis and goes on to make 9 defenses of his heavyweight title including a rematch with Bonavena who gave him hell, a shootout with Jerry Quarry who was better than Tommy Morrison for relative comparison, Jimmy Ellis who had won the heavyweight tournament after Ali was stripped, Bob Foster who in 1970 was a top 5 P4P fighter and the reigning lightheavyweight champion. And in maybe the best performance in the division’s history he beats an undefeated Ali.

I am more of an Ali guy than I am a Frazier guy. But most of all I am a fair guy. If you give Ali credit for beating Foreman in 1974, but want to make it seem as though Ali wasn’t the same in 1971 to discredit Frazier then what you’re trying to do won’t work over here.

Joe Frazier was a small, high energy pressure fighter. He’s not ever going to have a long prime. But it was long enough. He was heavyweight champion from 1967-73. Frazier was an ANIMAL. He had iron will, a full gas tank, and he was as tough as raw hide. If you watch any of the fights I named you know you’re looking at a special fighter. He’s a top 10 heavyweight ever. And he’s a top 10 ever fighter with under 40 fights.

His biggest issues is he gets judged too much after the 1st Ali fight. There is a big drop off in his physicality after that fight. You have to watch him before and during that fight. It’s the one when he had green and gold on. And he turned out to be the 3rd best heavyweight of his era. But most people will finish 3rd with Foreman and Ali in their era. That’s a killer era.

Don’t disrespect Joe Frazier. He was something different and if you know, then you know.

Hey Mr Edwards.

For your information, your mailbag remains a must read, thank you.

However, I'm disappointed that you have dared me to predict fights in the past and when I do, you don't publish. Take Spence-Garcia.

I said this is a Garcia encore for Spence. That he would beat up on Danny in much the same way he beat up on Mikey. That he was too strong, too busy and too versatile for Danny. That Danny is hesitant, low volume and refuses to box outside his comfort zone. That all Danny could offer was his chin. That Danny is not the same force at welterweight he was at the lower weight. Well, I saw a lot of predictions but I say mine was the most accurate. The only reason Danny fared a very slight  better than Mikey is that Errol showed a little ring rust.

I also repeated my assertion that Spence is ducking Crawford and true to form, when asked what's next for him, he steered clear of Crawford even though he sat as large as paint at ringside. From what I saw, Spence needs to bring an army and even then I still can't bet against Crawford.

Anyway, I'm not going to go back to what I said about Teofimo Lopez because I have a different issue this week. Don't you think the most hyped word in boxing is the so-called "upset". Ali twice overwhelmed a perfect replica of Foreman in Sonny Liston. How could him knocking out Foreman be an upset particularly as I hear Foreman used to hang around the Liston gym and could possibly have modelled himself on Liston?

The adage in boxing is a good big one will always beat a good little one. Why should Lopez beating Loma be an upset?

Tyson' s tumultuous personal life eventually spilled over into his boxing life so that by the time he fought Douglas he was a pale shadow of himself, having fired the best boxing brains around him and the praise singers and part goers had more say than Snowell and Bright in his preparations. He entered the ring in less than peak condition and all he had was a puncher's chance against a talented underachiever who was nevertheless up to the challenge before him.

As far as what I can see, a true upset has to be a victory against not only the odds but against adversity. If Conn had survived Louis' vicious 13th round onslaught and hung onto his points lead that would have been an upset as at that point Louis was still a potent and hungry champion while Conn was just a very good light heavyweight.

I could cite more examples but I don't want to be long. But what do you really think of the boxing upset? Don't you think you need to look at everything including all the circumstances surrounding a fight before you can call a win an upset? I mean, even a week before Kingston, Jamaica, Frazier was posing for pictures with pretty girls (something I had never seen before) and he was nowhere near the shape he was in for the first Ali fight when he entered that ring against Foreman.

Thank you for the great mailbags.

Katlholo
Johannesburg, South Africa.

Bread’s Response: I can only post but so many emails. I am NOT the editor. But I try my best to get between 5-8 in a week depending on the length.

I didn’t see your email but if you said that then you made a good prediction. Danny does NOT fight outside of his comfort zone and that seems to be his flaw at the elite level. If you’re not the faster, more athletic fighter. Then at times you may have to up the tempo to win and that’s not Danny’s strong suit. So that’s that.

Let’s see if Errol and Terence fight in 2021. If they don’t, then we can revisit the DUCK comment.

Anytime a fighter wins a fight where he is more than a 3 to 1 underdog, it’s an UPSET. That means that the oddsmakers or very important people in boxing don’t think he will win. That also means the general public most likely won’t be betting on him. Those little old men in Vegas are correct over 80% of the time. Your personal perception may be different and that should allow you to make some BIG money on boxing. But I think you’re reasoning is different than why an outcome is an upset. Upsets have to do with the odds first added in with the perception and most likely outcome.

Of course Buster Douglas beating Mike Tyson is an upset. It’s easy to say after the fact what we should have known. But that doesn’t mean going into the fight that the general public thought Douglas could beat Tyson.

I can tell you like Danny Garcia so you didn’t want to pick Errol Spence publicly. I can respect that. But tell me your thoughts on this. Do you think if Danny had seized the moment and fought Floyd Mayweather and Miguel Cotto when he had the chances that his career would have been different? Cotto offered him the fight Sadam Ali took. Danny would have defeated that version of Cotto. And Danny literally didn’t want to fight Mayweather. I never understood that. Not wanting to take on the biggest star of your era in your biggest payday always seemed odd. But let me explain why I think it cost him as a fighter.

Danny has slow feet and he doesn’t fight well going forward. Lamont Peterson, Keith Thurman and now Errol Spence proved it. But if Danny would have fought Floyd maybe they would have worked on cutting the ring off and developing better feet. Sometimes being forced to get better will make you better. Canelo had the same problems as Danny but he learned and got better. Thoughts?

Bread’s Response: I will not disagree with you. You actually make a great point. Sometimes when you are forced to face something it makes you better. It definitely helped with Canelo. In fact Canelo took on Lara a few months after Floyd. Canelo has very educated pressure feet because of those fights.

I also agree Danny would have kod that version of Cotto.

But the one thing about TIME, is you can’t go back in it.

You have to learn acceptance.  I don’t disagree with you but I honestly feel Danny overachieved in his career. Looking back at any career that didn’t end up undefeated can be criticized and even the careers that did end up undefeated still get criticized.

Bread -

I do not mean to be overly hyperbolic with this assessment, but is it just me or is Errol Spence starting to look a bit like a welterweight Andre Ward...? He always seems to have the next gear, a bit more strength, and the sharper mental flow. He can also be a dog in there. I see those gritty low shots on the belt line and hips.  He is a quiet bully. 

Both Spence and Crawford don’t like to get hit FIRST or LAST.  They will throw fire if they feel fire. Sign of a great fighter.  If this happens it is truly a 50/50 fight.

Happy Holidays to you and your family and wishing your fighters and team a prosperous holiday season and new year. Thank you for your contributions to the boxing community.

G
Boston

Bread’s Response: I like your analysis of Spence. He does have some Andre Ward in his game. Ward was a master at boxing going forward. I never thought about that comparison before. But I get it.

When you have fighters who RISE like Spence does it’s hard to pick someone to beat him. I think him and Crawford are also basically 50/50. I think it will come down to all of the little things in camp. Nutrition. Who peaked out the best? Literally who’s mind is the clearest. Who processes the fastest on THAT night. Who has less distractions? Who’s at their VERY BEST, when their BEST IS NEEDED.

Hello, love the column always.

Nothing serious here just a few random fantasy questions -

Out of the two currently revered welters, Spence and Crawford, which would have a better chance of defeating Floyd at 147? Watching Floyd - Castillo and Maidana, I feel style wise Spence could potentially be the biggest style nightmare for Floyd in recent times, endurance for days and relentless, not sure if he has more once punch power than Maidana but definitely would cause more consistent accumulative damage. Crawford on the other hand, I’m not sure sure - I feel since he’s not a high volume pressure fighter and Floyd would have been able to figure him out and grind out a cautious decision more easily than vs someone like Spence. It’s a shame these were just half a decade out of reach.

Question #2, what are some other mouth watering fantasy matches which were just out of each other’s eras? I feel Calzaghe - Ward would be one example, Lomachenko vs either Pacquiao and Marquez at 130/135 would each have also been intriguing for their own reasons though not as much as Crawford - Mayweather

Bread’s Response: Good question. Stylistically I feel like the Spence of the Lamont Peterson and Chris Aligieri time would have been a nightmare for Floyd. But if you watch Errol closely he’s more of a boxer these days. He’s not as violent as he was in those fights. He was a DESTROYER back then. He beats people up now but it’s not as violent and destructive.

It’s hard to assess a fight with an ADJUSTER like Crawford. He may be so good he can actually adjust to Floyd. There is no way of knowing. ADJUSTERS, adjust accordingly. For example Andre Ward is a master ADJUSTER. Ward didn’t look like he would win the Super 6 tournament. He was a 6 to 1 underdog. But once he started fighting those guys, he just ADJUSTED to their level and looked dominant in each and every fight.

Floyd seems more athletically gifted than Crawford but who knows who would win if they fought. Right now I would pick Floyd but Crawford is still writing his legacy. He can enhance it. It may drive Floyd crazy to fight a mirror image of himself. Who may not be quite at gifted but the gifts aren’t far off. But one who is more vicious and a bigger puncher and a switchy guy.

I can’t call who would be the easier fight.

Yes as Ward was getting to contender status Calzaghe was retiring that would have been a barn burner.

I think Donald Curry and Ray Leonard would have been one too. Curry won Ray’s vacant title in 1983. Leonard retired in 82 with the detached retina.

Carlos Monzon and Marvin Hagler. Monzon retired in 1977. Hagler was a top contender in 1977 but didn’t get a title shot until 1979.

I can literally go on all day with these because there is always someone coming behind a great fighter. It never stops. That’s why I don’t call it ducking when a fighter retires if he doesn’t come back. Because in a literal sense unless everyone retired at the same time, there is always a threat coming behind them.

Hey Bread,

While I don't think he's a bum by any means and he's certainly a legitimate opponent for Spence, I'm wondering if people are giving Garcia too much credit as a welterweight? His best overall wins have all come at junior welterweight. As to welterweight, his best wins have come against a washed-up Robert Guerrero, a washed-up Paulie Malinaggi, and a catchweight fight at 143 lbs. against Lamont Peterson that many people believe Garcia lost (and he certainly LOOKED like he lost come the end of that fight). His other welterweight victories are against gatekeeper level types. When he has fought next-level welterweights like Thurman and Porter, he lost. The one belt he won at welterweight was a vacant title against Guerrero, and like I said, Guerrero was a shell of his old self at that point.

It's a good fight tomorrow and I plan to pay for it because I want to see what Spence has left following the accident, but until he proves otherwise, I feel like Garcia is not quite fast enough, strong enough, or athletic enough to defeat the elites at welterweight. He can COMPETE, but I have my doubts that he can DEFEAT.

Thoughts?

Bread’s Response: I’m posting this comment because many feel the way you feel about Danny Garcia’s legacy. I thought his resume was SOLID but not spectacular. I didn’t think it was as good as say Miguel Cotto’s. But I did feel as though a win over Spence would put him in the HOF because of Spence’s current status. And despite some close calls I do think consistent winning does count for something.

The thing about a resume is most can be nitpicked. So let’s look at Danny’s. Beating Kendall Holt in that title eliminator was solid. Holt is a very capable fighter.

Beating Erik Morales for the title at 140 is a nice win. It’s not great because Morales was 35 and an ex 122 pounder. But he was the champion so you have to respect it.

Beating Amir Khan when he did was very, very good. Khan was coming off a controversial loss to Peterson but Danny was the underdog. We can’t change history after the fact. I know Khan is not a great fighter, but he was a great talent and in 2012 most thought Danny wasn’t ready.
The Zab Judah and Erik Morales rematch wins were good matchmaking. If you can match a champion with aging BIG names you still do it.

Lucas Matthysse looks now to be overrated but no one thought that in 2013. Danny faced him and beat him and that’s his career APEX. Danny was 25. Excellent win.

Directly after Danny had sort of a let down fight and struggled vs Mauricio Herrera.

He then takes another showcase vs Rod Salka. He caught flack for that. I understand why to be honest.

Then he fights Lamont Peterson at a catchweight and struggles again. That was tough on his reputation because he was still getting flack for the Herrera fight.

He fights Paulie Malignaggi is showcase fight in Brooklyn, which again is smart because Malignaggi is from Brooklyn and he’s a recognizable name.

He wins his 2nd title vs Robert Guerrero for a vacant strap. Guerrero wasn’t shot, he had a decent performance vs Thurman but he wasn’t prime either. Nice win.

Then Danny takes another tune up vs Samuel Vargas. No big deal.

In his next fight he tries to unify vs Keith Thurman and loses in a solid performance.

He comes back against another recognizable name in Brandon Rios.

Then fights Shawn Porter and loses again in a competitive fight.

He comes back and fights 2 more showcases vs Granados and Redkach before taking on Spence.

Ok so there are levels of separation in his performances. Holt was handled better by Tim Bradley than he was by Danny Garcia. But Bradley is HOF. Erik Morales was kod by Manny Pacquiao in 2006 at 130lbs. Danny struggled with him at 140 in 2012. But Pacman is an ATG. Zab Judah was kod in 2 by Kostya Tszyu in 2001. Danny had a tough night with him in 2013. But Tszyu is one of the great juniorwelters ever.

The triangle theory doesn’t work as far as who can beat who. But it does indicate level of dominance when looking at common opponents. I say this to say I don’t get why everyone is so hard on Danny and Angel. He overachieved in MY opinion. He never looked like Carlos Ortiz or Wilfred Benitez . I didn’t think Danny would go 50-0 through 3 divisions. He was a solid fighter. A nice looking kid. A kid with a big punch and good chin, that made a boat load of money and won some nice fights. Why does he get such harsh criticism? I don’t understand it. He did the best he could. And with smart people behind him he OUT KICKED his COVERAGE.

Were there any expectations of Danny being the Greatest fighter of Puerto Rican decent. Was he ever like Fleix Trinidad? I feel as though criticism should be relative to projection or expectations. Unless there was a projection of Danny being an All Time Great then I think it’s ridiculous to hear some of the things I hear about him.

What I observed about Danny and his brain trust is they don’t over match him. When he takes a tough fight, he gets rewarded with a showcase fight. Sometimes two in a row to build momentum. I think fans are hard on Danny because he benefits from matchmaking. But that’s not his fault. It’s his team’s responsibility to do what’s best for him.

Not everyone wants to take on Wilfred Benitez, Roberto Duran 2x, Ayub Kalule and Tommy Hearns in less than 2 years like Ray Leonard. But his talent level is different. Brain trust can’t tell a fighter certain things, but they do smart moves to preserve their status when it’s possible. Danny and his team really spreaded his tough fights out. In 8 years he took 5 fights that he had a 50% chance or more to LOSE. And in those fights vs the better fighters in their primes he’s 2-3. He beat Khan and Matthysse but lost to Porter, Thurman and Spence. But he took the tough fights when he had to. People are hard on Danny but there are way more ENABLED fighters in his PBC stable and of this era. I won’t name anyone because that’s not my style, but there is a welterweight who fought in Danny’s era that got bigger money to fight lesser guys and he lost to way lesser fighters than Danny and still kept getting nice pay days. This is not a Philly thing. I just really think you guys overlook other privileged fighters and fixate on Danny. He signed to face Spence before the accident. He deserves some credit for that.

I think it’s reasonable to say that Danny Garcia is an excellent fighter. Not an ATG but an excellent fighter. And because of his name value and longevity and ability to NOT get stopped badly, he still has a chance to be a HOF if he can upset the right guy.

They say the past is an indicator of the future. So I expect Danny to fight Omar Figueroa or Josesito Lopez next. And if he’s successful maybe Manny Pacquiao or Mikey Garcia. You can sort of tell how a fighter is matched in the past as to what is thought of him and what his true market value is.

You have talked in the past about the difference between “quitting” and “surrendering” or “capitulating”. Seems like everyone is coming down hard on Dubois... but I thought this was a case of surrender. What do you think? Do folks need to be more compassionate to Dubois and other fighters who “surrender”?

Also, even though we still have a few weeks to go... who do you think are some nominees for Fighter of the Year? 2020 has been rough and COVID has altered the standards. So with that in mind... who you got? I think Tyson Fury and Teofimo Lopez have solid cases. Sure they both only fought once this year... but MAN... did both guys make their one fight of 2020 COUNT or what?

Bread’s Response: I think Dubois surrendered. I think he wasn’t willing to risk his eye sight because he’s young. I don’t view that as a blatant quit, “pack it in” job.

Fighter of the Year will be either Tyson Fury, Teofimo Lopez or Jermell Charlo. I think Lopez will win because he defeated the most highly regarded fighter out of the 3 and he won ALL 4 belts and the RING. That’s very rare.

I have a question about boxers who seem to have charisma. It’s kind of a multi-part question... first, do you believe charisma is born or made? If it can be made, who are some boxers you would say have “manufactured charisma” (what I will call it)? Who are some born with it? The other part is are there different types of charisma? If so, what are they?

Bread’s Response: Every single person in the world has charisma. There are just different levels of it and it’s in the EYE of the Beholder.

Some fighters are intelligent enough to display their charisma. Some try to emulate others. Some have special charisma.

For example Terence Crawford does not have a loud personality. So what he does is get people talking about how good he fights. He shows it in his RING talent. Very smart. If he tried to act like Adrien Broner it wouldn’t work for him. I get as many emails for Crawford as I do any other fighter.

Speaking of Broner he has more out going natural charisma than most. He’s funny and witty. He has a flashy personality. But he sometimes he can be abrasive and he doesn’t do what Crawford does INSIDE the ring. So there are some highs and lows on how he’s received.

I think the fighters who exploit their charisma the best are the ones who UNDERSTAND why they are APPEALING. Ryan Garcia knows women like him. So he doesn’t hide it and he rides with it.

When displaying charisma it’s important to know what to display and not try to over do it. I always thought that Larry Holmes tried to be too much like Muhammad Ali and it made him better when he wasn’t as beloved as Ali. But Ali is not the guy you model yourself after. He’s 1 in 10 million.
Holmes could have taken a workmanlike champion charisma. And let people see more of his entrepanour side and he would have been fine.

The important thing for fighters is for them to let people see their most compelling sides and that will have it’s greatest effect.

Good question.

Bread,

It was good to see The Truth back in the ring and look like his usual self. There were a lot of questions about how his reaction time would be and how he would be able to take a punch. Fair to say he answered those two questions Saturday night.

As for the fight itself, I want to talk Danny first. I really felt he was as motivated for this fight as any other in his career and all week leading up to the fight he just had that focused look like he knew what was at stake. I felt he was very sharp early on and was throwing with Spence punch for punch and was giving a great effort. Danny has a big knock of not throwing enough punches but he threw far more punches against Spence than he did against Thurman and Porter. Granted, a lot of those shots were just pawing jabs but he had to throw them to at least attempt to keep Spence off of him. He just couldn't get past Spence's jab though and the body shots started to really take an effect on him in the middle rounds. If you noticed, he was throwing punch for punch early on but he didn't throw back any time he got touched to the body and would just end up backing up. I don't want to say the fight was completely taken out of him, but a decent part was and he got a bit frustrated.

Now for Spence. His offsetting jab is just beautiful. If you can't get past it, then you are going to be in for a LONG night. He has to be one of the most patient pressure fighters I have ever seen. The mental pressure is harder to overcome for an opponent than the actual shots themselves. He cuts off the ring very well and I'm wondering if some of that has to do with his prior football experience as he was a LB and RB and you have to work on angles for both positions. I have noticed though that his high pace has had him getting a bit winded late in fights and he has to take a round or two off to get back on track. I think it may be time for him to move up to 154 since the weight cut has to be brutal and it's not good for someone that active. Overall though, against a quality opponent he did very well and fought off any demons he may have had from the crash.

Take care.

Bread’s Response: I’m getting loads of Spence vs Garcia emails so I will try to answer parts I haven’t.

I do think Errol discouraged Danny a little bit. I think Danny landed some nice shots and may have buzzed Errol but Danny doesn’t change gears. It’s a gift and curse. Danny lulls his opponents to sleep with his methodical gear, but against a high IQ fighter with responsible defense it’s hard to set them up. Errol wasn’t having it. Danny would have had to force Errol into mistakes. Danny sort of waits for his opponents to make the mistakes. It’s a difference.

As for Errol I don’t know if he should move up. Him getting winded could just be a thing for that night. Maybe it was rust. Maybe he was on weight too long and didn’t have calories to burn. Maybe Danny hurt him and he played a good poker face. And maybe he should move up. It’s really hard to tell. But in this era fighters fight once or twice a year so everything is judged on small microcosms. Errol is a smart kid, he’s going to figure it out.

You guys have to also understand fighters are Practitioners. They try different workouts and nutrition in camps to see which one works best.

See that Pulev is fighting AJ. I'm not sure Pulev has anything to offer AJ at this stage in his career. I think Pulev will probably spend a good deal of the time right in front of AJ and Joshua knows he can keep a flat-footed guy who boxes at bay with his jab AJ is also closer to gis prime than Pulev. Of course anything can happen, but this is pretty clearly a fight AJ should.wun handily. Anyway, I remembered that Pulev once fought Wlad and it got me thinking about Wlad's AJ and Fury losses.

Why would Tyson Fury respect Wlad's punches so much, and not Denotay Wilder's? Looks to me that Fury had an easier time winning rounds against Wilder than he did against Wlad (of course getting up from those knockdown weren't,xt easy but those were 2 rounds across two fights)? Why is that? I know Fury has shown himself to make adjustments, and I know that Wilder is a guy you want to deprive of room for him to step into his punch, and I know Wlad likes to lull his guy to stay in front of him, but his win over Wlad was so narrow compared to how he handled Wilder who was in his prime (yes the first fight was a draw, but overall he seemingly boxed like the guy who was in control). I get that he was in control against Wlad  but it just seemed like the slimmest of margins.

Is Wlad better than people give him credit for? I have heard people say Wlad is overrated and has no courage and that his two losses before he retired are proof that he is not a great champion due to his competition, but he made Fury be very careful.....
I don't know. Your thoughts?
Thanks
Jay

Bread’s Response: I think if Joshua is not gun shy he will light Pulev up. But let’s remember in the Ruiz rematch, Joshua fought a stick and move fight. He wasn’t his usual stalking self. So let’s see if that was a style he used for that fight, or if he doesn’t have the confidence to Stalk Box anymore.

Wlad is a more complete boxer than Deontay Wilder. Wlad’s skillset is higher. Wlad has a more 2 fisted attack. And both are big punchers. Wlad is a lights out also. So Fury may have had to be more careful vs Wlad.

Also you have to realize he fought Wilder twice. So he had a chance to adjust. Maybe if he fought Wlad twice, he would have dominated him more in the rematch also. So you have to factor that in.

The thing about Wlad is no one questions his physical ability. He may be the most physically gifted fighter ever at heavyweight. But his chin, stamina and composure are the things that have let him down. Not his ability or skills.

Bread,

I know Danny just lost his third fight at WW, but I can't believe some fans who are now calling him a gatekeeper and overrated. This is EXACTLY why fighters are hesitant to step up and constantly take hard fights. What shame is there to lose to the guys Danny has lost to? What is worse is you have people dogging Spence for not stopping Danny. Um, who exactly has even come close to putting Danny down and badly hurting him? He's a TOUGH guy and likely will never get stopped as long as he is in his prime or close to it.

Take care.

Bread’s Response: If Danny was so OVERRATED then why was he the UNDERDOG vs Khan, Matthysse, Thurman and Spence?

Danny will NEVER be a GATEKEEPER. His father won’t allow him to be one.

Only 1% of boxing fans are humans, lol. The rest are TROLLS. Never listen to them.

Send Questions to dabreadman25@hotmail.com