By Stephen "Breadman" Edwards
The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards discussing topics such as the fall mega-fight between Canelo Alvarez and Gennady Golovkin, the Andre Ward vs. Sergey Kovalev rematch, Andre Dirrell vs. Uzcategui, and more.
Good call on the prediction of the canelo/Chavez. I felt it would be more competitive. I truly feel that Canelo's record has been built off fighting light weights, junior welterweights, and welterweights. With the exception of Lara, he hasn't even fought any tough junior middleweights. At the time, the trout fight looked like a good win for canelo but it looks like trout may go on to become more of a gatekeeper. It may seem like I'm dumping on canelo, but I like him I just think he has been matched very carefully, through little fault of his own. Thanks for the read.
Bread’s Response: You have to give Canelo credit for the Trout win. Trout was undefeated and it was a unification fight. I do think Canelo has been matched favorable but what super star has not been. It’s the way boxing is. In my opinion he’s fighting GGG at the “right” time. But he still has to deliver in the ring. Canelo can fight he just gets superstar privilege. It’s didn’t start with him and it won’t stop with him.
What's going on Breadman? Let me start off by saying that I enjoy reading your columns on bscene and appreciate you sharing your valuable knowledge with us boxing fans, for me personally it gives me a fresh take on fights and fighters to see them in a different light. Saying that I never thought of actually writing you until I read your most recent mailbag, where I was surprised how you really went in on Kovalev. I say this with no disrespect, but I sensed a bit of bias coming from your side where usually you share only your impartial and objective opinions and takes in your mailbags.
For me you painted Kovalev as if he lost the last fight clearly and now he is training with "no purpose" and no where as seriously as Ward, and will definitely loose the fight because Ward trains harder and will improve to the point of actually making Kovalev quit? I understand that this is your personal opinion Bread, but to me it seems a little bit overstretched taking into consideration the facts which were laid out in their first fight.
You wrote that you "still don’t know who won the last one", just to clarify is it because you haven't watched or scored the fight again or you are just still on the fence about the outcome and the scorecard? Many of the fighters and coaches in the boxing circle such as Money Floyd and coach Robert Garcia to name a few, have went on record and stated that they thought that Kovalev won the first fight, an opinion that I also share. It's also not to far fetched to say that most of the boxing world thought the same way. In my opinion there is no way that Ward will make Kovalev quit ever, they are made out of two different cloths. Can you please share what makes you think that Kovalev might quit or how would Ward ever achieve that? For me personally Ward can't improve much of what he already possessed in the first fight and that was his physical condition, durability and persistence. Kovalev made that fight close because of himself not because of anything that Ward was doing. For me if Kovalev comes into the fight in his peak condition and doesn't take his foot of the gas like he did in parts of the first fight, he will put Ward into survival mode from the start and might stop him, I say might because I know Ward is very tough mentally and will not quit. In my opinion you forgot to mention a very important fact from the first fight which was that Kovalev completely took away Ward's main weapon which is his inside game. I am not sure what game plan will Ward utilize this time, but I think it will be similar to the first one. You actually summed it up very well in writing what Ward was doing in their first fight, which was "clawing and scratching to keep it close like he did in the last one". I think this one will be no different from the side of Ward, but what will be different is that Kovalev will not give him anything to grab onto.
Last but not least more of a personal question and again with no pun intended. You mentioned that you have watched Kovalev train and I assume like most of us it would be by watching clips of his training footage from youtube, is that correct? If that is indeed the case, like many of us boxing fans including me who utilize youtube and other social media to keep track and follow some of our current favorite fighters, you might have also heard on social media about Kovalev's racist antics. Has that at all played in into forming your opinion about the rematch?
Thanks for taking your time to read this. From reading your mailbags over time, I know how diligently you approach each question and I really enjoy your breakdowns. I hope you can do the same with mine, if not its all good keep doing what you are doing.
All the Best,
Hanz
Bread’s Response: I have always shown Sergey Kovalev respect as a fighter and I still do. Kovalev going on the road taking some of the fights he had to take has been remarkable. He’s the only elite fighter in boxing who has had to take so many tough fights as the B side or in his opponent’s home country or town. I believe if he beats Ward he’s a HOF. He may be one now…
I don’t speak on his racist social media content because of a few reasons. One is I am rarely asked about it. Two is I don’t know if he runs his own social media. And three is it doesn’t have anything to do with how good he can fight. I look at a fighter’s ability to fight and mental make up when breaking down a fight. His personal views are not important to me. It also contaminates the ability to be objective.
When I say I still can’t tell who won. I mean it as a compliment to both fighters. I don’t think Ward or Kovalev won more than 7 rounds or lost more than 5. It was that kind of fight. It was the kind of fight where every time you watch it you can score the swing rounds a different way. There were at least 4 swing rounds. That’s a lot in a 12 round fight. When the decision was being announced I wasn’t sure who was going win. There a few fights that I have watched and I wasn’t sure who won. Chocalitito vs Cuadras, Oscar vs Sweet Pea, Holmes vs Norton and Ward vs Kovalev.
When I observe Kovalev. I see an ornery man. I see a man who likes to be alone. I could be wrong but that’s what I see. I see a man who has a natural agitation towards resistance and other’s opinions. In between one of the rounds of his fight with Ward I saw him suggest that someone else talk instead of his head coach. He also seems aggravated that he didn’t stop Ward. From my experience fighters who have this disposition don’t do as well late in fights because they are fighting out of anger and agitation.
I think Kovalev is one of the 5 best fighters in the world. But I think Ward can improve more in the 2nd fight. I don’t think Ward fought nearly as good as he could have fought. Check his fights with Kessler and Dawson. I think Kovalev can fight a little better but he doesn’t have as much room for improvement. His distance fights vs Chilemba and Hopkins tell me that.
It’s not like Kovalev “can’t” win the rematch. He can. But my guts and history tell me the more well rounded fighter usually does better in an immediate rematch. It’s not personal it’s just my opinion. Remember I picked Ward to win a controversial decision in the first fight. I also said he would have to get up off the canvas to do it. I see this fight 2 ways. The first way is Ward gets off to a good start and Kovalev the high powered guy is fighting from the bottom. Remember the good start Holyfield and Leonard got vs Tyson and Duran in the rematches. If Kovalev is down 3-0 or gets dropped early he’s in big trouble.
Or Kovalev can start well again and force Ward to go deep. But without the knockdown and visual shaking of Ward I think Ward will still win a close but clearer decision like Mayweather did Castillo in the rematch. It’s just my opinion let’s see how it turns out.
What's up Bread?
I just wanted to respond to your comments in the latest mailbag about Canelo-GGG. You mentioned numerous instances where "the aging steady fighter who is not overwhelming athletically takes on the faster, younger, high-riding fighter in his prime and he struggles". It seems to me that Daniel Jacobs fits that bill and while Golovkin did look human he was also able to land that ramrod jab consistently on a fighter who was bigger, faster, and fighting the fight of his life. Canelo definitely has the advantage in hand speed and I could see him countering GGG effectively off the ropes but can he do it for 12 rounds? Golovkin has shown an ability to remain calm under fire for the most part (his reckless approach with Kell Brook notwithstanding) and I have yet to see Canelo face the sort of intelligent pressure that Golovkin will bring. That being said I agree with your points about the timing of the fight favoring Canelo but I think that GGG has already seen a faster, younger, high riding opponent in Daniel Jacobs while Canelo has yet to see a steady technician like GGG.
I also think its worth mentioning that Canelo has yet to face an elite or even top-15 ish middleweight while Golovkin has spent his career beating up the best available guys (for the most part) at 160. When I consider all this I see the fight playing out as follows:
Canelo jumps out to an early lead with judge-friendly combinations off the ropes as GGG stalks patiently. Sometime around round 4 Golovkin starts to find a home for that power jab and digging left hook to the body. Canelo shows his pedigree by battling on virtually even terms while paying the price. I see Golovkin beginning to impose his will by round 8 and while Canelo has tremendous handspeed I think his lack of footspeed will make things interesting. I do not yet have a prediction for the fight but that's how I can see it playing out.
Thanks again for your insights and I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Peace,
William in West Palm
Bread’s Response: I see the fight similar to you. But I will add. Canelo’s penchant for using the ropes as his 3rd leg is a critical part of this fight. He’s going to go to the ropes. There is no doubt about that. The question is can he win fighting off of the ropes. If he wins the exchanges while he’s against the ropes he’s cooking with fish grease. If he doesn’t he’s going to get carved up like a turkey. Playing on the ropes allows Canelo to rest and still beat his opponent’s up.
I believe Canelo has stamina issues. If he’s made to move and stand his ground in the center of the ring that will burn him out sooner. GGG is the best fighter in the world at putting his opponent’s back up against the ropes. We shall see…
Hi!
If you get a second to reply to this that would be great. I just started reading your "Daily Bread" section on boxingscene.com and thought I'd ask you some stuff to see how it connects to my existing interpretations about the Golovkin vs Alvarez fight this September.
I hate to simplify this superfight, but sometimes you can distill a swirling mass of data down to a simple truth. And so I wondered: is this fight simply a matter of Golovkin's feet vs Alvarez's upper body movement? I always felt that feet win the fight because they are the pro-active and strategic variable that let you decide when the fight happens. Golovkin's feet and timing help him press and engage at his own will. This pressure will create a mental and physical force that will wear down Alvarez, who doesn't have the feet to outmaneuver him. I mean, we haven't seen him do much with his feet, have we? Do you think he can make small pivots and take those small steps around Golovkin to get off his line of attack? Maybe he can, but that's not what he goes to. My coach once said that if you look back at a fighter's earlier bouts, you'll see a lot of the same things happening. Alvarez never started out with great feet, and they never got any better. He only got better at what he was already good at (which is still impressive). Won't being on that "hair trigger" all night be more tiring for a guy like him that likes/needs to take breaks during the fight than for the guy that is setting the pace? I dunno man. Question marks everywhere. Duran lost his punch when he moved up and he lost to good, bigger guys (Hagler and Hearns). I mean, Archie Moore was a better boxer than Marciano, but Marciano wouldn't take his foot off the gas and he eventually ran right over Moore (who had a list of KO's and didn't look old until Marciano fought him). I can't help but think the same thing happens here. I don't think Golovkin has slipped, I think he fought two great movers. Alvarez is not a great mover with his feet...
The sparring notes from Doug Fischer when he visited Big Bear in 2011 were quite interesting (though, sparring is sparring and it was, what, six years ago now?). Did you read them? If so, what were your thoughts?
Here's a clearer question, maybe because I'm reading the above and it's a lot: Does a Golovkin win mean that people will go around saying Canelo was"exposed", or will both men get the credit they deserve? It seemed like lots of people were saying Golovkin was exposed when he beat Jacobs. In my opinion, the word "exposed" depends on the quality of the eye and the mind making the observations. The only thing that surprised me in that Jacobs's fight was Jacobs size coupled with his speed meant the big guy could take a punch, but at the same time wasn't get hit constantly enough for GGG to rack up damage. He moved well for a big MW, I felt. GGG deserved the nod though. To be the man you gotta beat the man.
Thoughts? It's probably too much reading, I won't be upset if you don't have the time to reply. Life gets busy! :-)
Sincerely,
Jay
Bread’s Response: I don’t like the word exposed. But if GGG loses to Canelo many will say he was “exposed”. Floyd Mayweather also stands to gain a lot of historical standing if Canelo wins. Because he would be the only fighter to defeat Canelo and Canelo defeated the monster in GGG.
I have defended GGG’s legacy for quite some time but the truth is if he loses to Canelo the media critics are going to kill his legacy. I feel bad but that’s the game we are in. Canelo is a competitor but from a legacy standpoint he has more room for error. He can lose to Golovkin.
I don’t think Brook is a great mover. Jacobs showed great movement. Brook was just the smaller man and he pulled the trigger fast. It took Golovkin some time to readjust his eyes. I think the same adjustment will be needed in this fight. I still haven’t decided who is going to win. But I will say the stars have lined up for Canelo
Hi Stephen,
Just wanted to say that I really enjoy reading your work.
I was wondering what your opinion is on Dirrell vs. Uzcategui? Dirrell hasn’t been active and Uzcategui can bang pretty good.
Was hoping to hear back from you today. J
Best regards,
Ken.
Bread’s Response: Dirrell is the more talented guy but as you stated he’s been inactive. Dirrell has also been getting dropped lately. So that coupled with inactivity is no bueno. I don’t know enough about Uzcatgui to pick him over Dirrell but this is no cakewalk fight. If Dirrell does not win a world title he will probably go down as the most talented guy of the last decade or so to not win one.
Send Questions & Comments to dabreadman25@hotmail.com