Bread, you saved me some big money this weekend. I was very high on Brian Norman but every time someone would ask you about the fight, you kept saying you never saw Norman fight a black fighter with movement and you referred to the Bocachica fight. I went back and saw highlights and I also noticed Norman struggled with Quinton Randall. I want to thank you because I was going to go heavy on Norman. I just thought he punched too hard and Devin wouldn’t be able to take it. My question is where do Haney and Norman go from here. Rematch or their separate ways?
Bread’s response: I doubt if we see an immediate rematch. I don’t think it’s necessary. Haney won clean enough where a rematch is not warranted right away.
Punching power is very important but it’s overrated at the same time. The fighter who can take his opponent’s punch the best is the puncher in the fight, that's not always the fighter with the higher ko%. And the better fighter usually lands his best punches the most often and defends his opponent’s best punches the most often. Devin was better in each aspect. And oftentimes we only assume the answer because one of the participants has a higher KO%.
This was a very hard fight for me to pick but I surely didn’t assume that Haney couldn’t hurt Norman. Anyone can be hurt. Anyone! I think Haney has the world at his feet right now. I’m assuming he can fight whoever Turki agrees he can fight to honor their three-fight deal. I’m sure there is a list of quality opponents. Most importantly Devin would be a huge favorite over everyone at 147 at this current moment.
As for Norman, stay high on him. It’s not over for Brian Norman Jr. He showed some stuff in the fight. Haney was just a little too seasoned and a little too talented at this current moment. I actually think Norman would be the favorite over the other three champions at welterweight. And if Norman wants a rematch with Haney, the move would be to go get the other belts to make the rematch tempting for Haney.
Hey Breadman. Thanks so much for sharing your knowledge. This mail bag is a real pleasure to read. I’m on the same boat as everyone else when I see Moses Itauma as an extremely exciting prospect and a possible generational talent. But my question is this: How come nobody is calling him out on illegal blows? I saw his KO punch of Demsey McKean as being a clear punch to the back of the head. In his KO of Whyte, I saw at least one or twice where Whyte was in a high guard, so he basically came down and chopped at the top of his head. These aren’t punches where his opponent is doing some illegal head movement and putting themselves in a spot where there’s nothing to hit at. They’re punches that come in at such an extreme angle they land illegally. Am I just seeing things? I feel like I have a decent eye for this type of stuff. Take care, Brennan, Vancouver, BC
Bread’s response: I did NOT see Moses Itauma hit Dillian Whyte with illegal blows. I saw blows that struck Whyte on the side of the head, not the back of the head. A boxing glove is approximately six inches wide, so if part of the glove is on the ear and the other part is in the area behind the ear, that’s still a CLEAN shot. If those types of shots were considered illegal, most fighters would lose by DQ. Sorry but I don’t see it the way you saw it.
Hello Mr Edwards. I’ve been a boxing fan for the better part of my life (I’m 69) and have always been amazed by the fact that boxers are not better protected financially. This is a job for them, and one that is very dangerous and doesn’t last. There’s no union, no organization to take care of them once they can no longer make a living or have retired from boxing. You are respected, have a voice and a platform to help, and as you seem to be an extremely decent human being, is it, perhaps, possible to start a movement to help these guys, who every week, entertain us by putting their lives on the line? BTW, this is not a mailbag question (but if you want to publish it, maybe others can chime in). Thank you, L Dos Santos, from near Boston.
Bread’s response: Boxing is tough. The other big sports in the US have built-in pensions but in boxing, a fighter has to research and do his own personalized 401k. I have my own. My suggestion is for boxers to find managers who do these things for them. And to also be disciplined. Instead of buying a chain for 50k, contribute that 50k to their 401k and get it started asap.
But on a bigger scale, it would be easier if it was just part of their salaries. But in order for this to happen, a union would help. But I don’t believe a union is wanted in boxing. Too many wrongdoings would get uncovered and the sport would never be the same. Therefore, unfortunately, boxers will have to obtain their own retirement plans in my opinion.
Hello Breadman. I agree with you that there are tiers to all-time greatness. The way I see it there are also tiers to the level fighters are classed as. For example, the very top, true elite S-tier fighters, if you will, they have everything. It’s the tier I have Terence Crawford and Bam Rodriguez in currently. This level of fighter doesn’t leave any food on the table, they are always in position to punch, and they never do anything for no reason; very little wasted movement. These are two of the only guys who will consistently counter to the body. They can fight inside and outside, they can slip, parry, use feet for defence and offence, and have enough power in both hands and can throw every punch. They have the conditioning to go 12 rounds and not be gassed out, and can hold a shot too if they do get hit. Truly complete fighters who do things the right way; the way it’s supposed to be done. They come for the knockout every time if it’s there. If we are talking solely about ability, without factoring in achievement, then in a pound-for-pound sense these are the best two fighters in the world in my view. A tier or half tier below is where I would put Bivol and Usyk, in A or A+ tier. These are absolutely great fighters, and have very possibly proved they are all-time great already. For me, however, they lack a few things that Crawford and Bam have. They are a little more rigid in straight lines. Bivol, if you ask him to fight inside, I don’t think it’s happening. He wants everything on the end of his punches and that’s that. Usyk, I was watching a little of one of his fights with Fury and you know it was really the straight left hand, to head and body, that did the job. If Fury were to fight him a third time and said he was going to fight southpaw, I might actually pick him to win this time. If you take away the left from Usyk, while he does for sure have other tools in his toolbox, I’m not sure he has the adaptability of a Bam or a Crawford. Maybe what I’m saying is Usyk and Bivol are quite conventional, whereas Bam and Crawford have that textbook but also have more improvisation and are more free-flowing. Bivol and Usyk are very systematized, the way that most Eastern European fighters are. Another thing I would say is all four have great composure. This tends to come with confidence in great ability in my observation. I’m very interested to hear what you think about this and if you make a distinction between being a fully complete fighter vs being complete in a certain style. Lastly, and I hope this isn’t too long, I really respected the way you spoke about your split with Caleb Plant. You spoke highly of him before you ever trained him and you still speak highly of him now. I hope that other fighters pay attention to the way you conducted yourself, and understand that the character you’ve shown shows you’re the real deal. Much respect.
Bread’s response: Thank you. I think it’s a lack of character to speak highly of someone, then you separate and speak lowly of them. Caleb is a heck of a fighter and I will always stand on that. Our trainer/fighter relationship just ran its course. It happens and it doesn't mean nasty public drama.
I like the way you frame the tiers but I don’t view them that way. Let me explain. Just because a fighter can do more things than another fighter, it doesn’t mean that fighter is better. My tiers are simple. Who I think is the best, who accomplished the most and who would win the most fights if everyone is the same size. Your definition is more of a scouting report or fighter breakdown referencing who can do more. It’s different than me assessing levels of greatness.
Let me try to illustrate what I’m saying. Muhammad Ali vs Alexis Arguello. Arguello is a better puncher than Ali. He’s a better body puncher. He’s a better inside fighter. He has a better left hook and uppercut. Yet most would rate Ali over Arguello as a fighter; although Arguello is more of an all-around fighter. Ali in my opinion can simply beat more people if everyone was the same size. I’m more comfortable betting on Ali vs the field, than I am betting Arguello vs the field. I think Arguello would lose more than Ali. Although they’re both great, I feel like Ali is on the highest tier and Arguello is a tier or two below.
At this current moment, I feel like Usyk is on the highest tier of any active fighter. I feel like Crawford is there also and Bam is approaching them rapidly. I love Bam but no way can I put him over Usyk right now. You may have a point about Fury switching to the southpaw stance. But Fury does switch. He had 24 rounds to figure it out and he didn’t. I’m not going to hold that against Usyk, especially when he’s giving up 50lbs and 6 inches.
I agree with you that Bivol doesn’t like it on the inside. But until a fighter can expose that and beat him up on the inside, I’m not going to criticize him for his lack of inside fighting. If he’s good enough to get the job done, he’s good enough to get the job done.
Good day, Bread. This weekend made me realize how under-appreciated footwork and upper body movement in boxing are. Boxers with elite movement/holding the center of the ring can neutralize feared power punchers/high volume (Floyd, Shakur, Haney, Bivol, Whitaker). Guys with great upper body movement as well (Canelo vs GGG 2 or Tank-Roach). Footwork/movement really is the foundation for everything. Hopefully Benavidez fights Bivol at some point as I think that is the best fight to be made in boxing, along with Ortiz-Ennis at the moment. I'm a little worried as an older Artur was able to get Bivol in spots and right now David is on a heater! Thanks as always.
Bread’s response: I love the matchups with Benavidez vs Bivol or Beterbiev. But it doesn’t appear that Bivol or Beterbiev are available at this current moment. By the way, I favor Benavidez to beat both in his current form.
Hi Bread. Love your column and how objective and insightful your analysis is. I’ve been a boxing fanatic since about 1970 (Ali-Frazier lol), so have seen a lot of the greats over the years. I just wanted your take on three fighters who seem to never get much of a mention as all-time greats but who I think were superb boxers: Carlos Zarate, Wilfredo Gomez and Wilfred Benitez. I’m pretty confident you’ll have the same view of them as me, but I so highly value your views that I’d love to hear your perspective. Many thanks in advance. Ed.
Bread’s response: Carlos Zarate had the best record in boxing when he fought Wilfredo Gomez. I believe he was 52-0 with 51 KOs. I think Zarate is one of the ten best punchers ever from featherweight and below. I believe he’s a top 10-15 Mexican fighter ever. And I believe he's hovering in the top 10 of best bantamweights ever. But I honestly don’t view him as high as Gomez or Benitez. When I give Zarate the eyeball test, I know how to contextualize eras and film quality. He doesn’t show up as high to me as other greats. I believe Inoue and Donaire beat him without going to their brink. I also think that Rafael Marquez beats him. So while I feel Zarate is a great fighter, he doesn’t knock my socks off when I give him the eyeball test, although I do respect him.
I feel like Wilfredo Gomez at one point in time had a case for being the best fighter in the world. I think he’s no worse than the third best fighter ever from PR. Only Tito Trinidad and Carlos Ortiz can even argue. I believe Gomez is no worse than the second best junior featherweight ever. Most likely he’s number one, but Barrera and Morales have cases, especially Barrera who won the title there three times. Gomez was special and he would give current P4P star “Monster” Inoue all he wanted best night for best night. He's also a top five puncher ever from 122lbs and below. Gomez could CRACK!
Wilfred Benitez is as gifted a fighter as you can ever watch. Watch him vs HOF Carlos Palomino, Roberto Duran and Antonio Cervantes. Watch him vs Tommy Hearns and Ray Leonard, albeit in defeat. Benitez could hang in any era, at any weight from 140-154. If he had slightly more longevity in the mid 80s he would be right with Gomez, Trinidad and Ortiz as his country’s best ever fighter. Right now, I believe he's fourth best ever from PR.
I don’t consider Benitez the best defensive fighter ever. But I feel he has a case for having the best defensive reflexes ever. His nickname “El Radar” was perfect for him. He was so relaxed in the ring because he knew it was hard to hit him clean. It gave him a sense of confidence and composure. It took that type of confidence to fight Antonio Cervantes at 17 years old. All-time great fighter.
Hello Mr. Edwards. I am sitting here confused and more than a little disappointed after listening to Vergil Ortiz basically turn down the “Boots” fight for a fight with a severely diminished and probably done Errol Spence. I mean, seriously, what kind of move is that? No one wants to see Ortiz vs Spence. I don't see a competitive fight there or even a lucrative, cynical money grab. Ortiz says that he doesn't care what anyone says about him fighting Spence. If he follows through with it, he's going to see how fast the fans no longer care about his career. People are not in the mood to support fighters who don't give us what we want now that so many of them do give us the fights that we want to see. Don't let the door hit you in the ass, Vergil! What I don't understand is why Ortiz would even consider such a B.S. move. I don't know if it's lack of confidence or the allure of a quick money grab. What do you think ? Thank you!
Bread’s response: Ok, you have to realize this is a business and prideful business at that. I bring up pride for a reason. Fighters and their teams speak a prideful language. I think Team Ortiz understands Boots is dangerous and they want to make sure all other resources and money options are explored before taking on such a talent. Errol Spence is a huge draw in the Dallas, Texas area. Vergil Ortiz is from the Dallas, Texas area. Errol is black. Vergil is a Mexican American. This is always a big sell. And let’s not forget what Terence Crawford just did to Canelo and what Errol did to Mikey Garcia. I think the Mexican and Mexican/American fan base want revenge and I think the fight would sell. I also wouldn’t count Errol out. I am curious as to what form he has worked himself into during his lay off. At his best he’s a handful for Ortiz. Let’s be respectful to Errol.
On the other hand, I think Boots Ennis called team Ortiz’s bluff. He did something that’s out of his character. He went to Ortiz vs Lubin. He got in the ring. He called Ortiz out. And he agreed to the fight. So it’s not a good look to insinuate a fighter is ducking you, then that fighter comes to your home state, calls you out in front of the world, and you start exploring “other” options. That’s what Team Ortiz did. But that’s boxing.
Let’s just hold out and be optimistic. Vergil Ortiz himself seems like he’s willing to fight whoever. Maybe he will silently put pressure on his team to make the fight. Vergil has the power to make this happen if he OVERRIDES his team. Speaking of Errol Spence, he made the play to make the Crawford fight. Vergil can do the same if wants Boots next. Maybe they will fight on the Benavidez vs Ramirez card on Cinco De Mayo of 2026. I still have hope…
Not a fan of Devin Haney, but the slander of an undisputed champion has to stop. If Jim Lampley and Larry Merchant were saying three-division titlist Haney was boring and fought scared back in the 1990s, I really wouldn’t have a problem with it. They were critical of everyone and I loved it. I miss it. When I hear Eddie Hearn and Oscar De La Hoya say it… while simultaneously telling me zero-time champions and drug cheats Connor Benn and Ryan Garcia are awesome… it makes me want to vomit. Do you roll your eyes the way I do when you hear other promoters talk about Haney (especially on the live broadcast!) or is he actually boring and fighting scared?
Bread’s response: You know what, I’m really confused about something. Why does a fighter like Devin Haney take more criticism than fighters like Ryan Garcia and Conor Benn? It doesn’t make me vomit but it does let me know, there is no integrity in boxing. When Benn and Garcia are talked about or interviewed you rarely hear their positive PED test brought up. You rarely hear about their shortcomings as fighters. If you listen closely you will realize that Haney got more criticism for winning every round against Jose Ramirez than Garcia did for getting outboxed and dropped by Rolly Romero and they fought on the same night, on the same card.
Eddie Hearn and Oscar De La Hoya don’t promote Haney. They promote his potential rivals, so I get why they say what they say. But the general media is not Benn and Garcia’s promoters. It’s very strange but I understand it. I get it. I believe I know why Haney gets as much criticism as he does. I actually believe it's for two reasons but I will only get into one at this moment, I don't have the room to type everything out at this moment.
The people who criticized Haney’s performance vs Norman don’t like him. It’s very simple. They know he’s talented and if he boxes he’s difficult to beat. So they want him to fight a style that’s counterproductive to him winning. They try to make it seem like he’s SO boring. I’m not suggesting Haney is the world’s most exciting fighter. But it’s an exaggeration to call him boring for the Norman performance. The first half of the fight had solid action. I thought he did an excellent job. I’m not going to say it was an overly EXCITING fight. But it was a very impressive performance. The only fight that Haney really quelled down the action was against Ramirez and that was to be expected after the Ryan Garcia fight, especially when they were signed up for a rematch.
I can assure you that if Haney turns into a slugger and gets KO’d, those same people will laugh at him and say he has low IQ and needs better defense. Just like they did before they learned that Ryan Garcia tested positive for PEDS. Brian Norman was picked to win this fight by about 50% of the boxing media and fans. Their reasoning was Norman was too big of a puncher and that Haney was gun shy and had poor punch resistance. They also said Norman’s best punch was a left hook and Haney didn’t defend the left hook well. If that is your reasoning, which was understandable by the way, how can you criticize Haney for hooking with a hooker? Dropping him. Busting up his nose. Trying to stop him. Then outboxing him.
"They" may want excitement but their ultimate goal is to get Haney knocked out. I don’t care what any of them says. That’s not constructive criticism. That’s destructive criticism. I know this because the same people didn’t criticize Ramirez for losing every single round to Haney and not being able to cut the ring off. Ramirez lost every single round to a fighter who was supposedly chinny. They didn’t criticize Norman for getting outboxed, outpunched and outskilled. They criticized the actual winner of the fight. And when Devin turned into a slugger and tried to walk Garcia down, they laughed at him and cheered because they THOUGHT he lost. All you have to do is sit back and watch the contradictory movements by some in the media.
I have seen fights where a fighter simply tried to run the clock out and not apply any offense. William Scull’s performance vs Canelo comes to mind. Scull RAN and I could not and never will take up for that type of performance. It was disgusting and I will never watch Scull fight again. But what Haney did to Norman was boxing. Haney was actually being a boxer-puncher. Norman’s nose didn’t bleed on its own.
Dmitri Bivol, whom I think is a first-ballot HOF’er and a top five or six fighter in the world, goes the distance at about the same rate Haney does. He scores knockdowns at about the same rate Haney does. And he puts himself at risk at about the same rate Haney does. But you rarely hear him called a “boring runner”. Let that sink in when you think all of this Haney criticism is coming from a purely objective place.
What do you think went wrong for Brian Norman? Do you think he was out coached? Was the moment too big? Not enough experience? Maybe a bad style matchup? I know you said you didn’t know if Norman could cut the ring off but he seemed over his head, as did his team. Bill Haney said he got some advice from Virgil Hunter to get out to Riyad early and the Normans came late. Do you think that was a factor? Something had to go wrong, that fight looked too lopsided to me.
Bread’s response: There is always a reason for why a fighter loses, but sometimes the other guy is just better. Sometimes the reason is not so complex. But I will try my best to address your specific questions.
I can’t say if Brian Norman Sr. was out-coached because I didn’t hear every single thing that was said in each corner. I also was not in camp with either team. But I do think Team Norman undervalued Devin Haney. I don’t think they underestimated him but I think they undervalued him. They undervalued his ability to hurt Brian and his ability to take Brian’s punches.
They kept saying he couldn’t punch and he had no power. Even after Haney scored a knockdown, I heard Norman Sr. say that Haney couldn’t punch. I don’t understand that one particular thing. It doesn’t make sense to say a fighter can’t punch who knocks your fighter down. That can’t be good for Norman’s self-esteem to think Devin can’t punch yet he dropped him and hurt him. For the record this is NOT a criticism, it’s just an observation.
I think Norman went into this fight believing Haney can’t hurt him and getting hurt had to be very humbling. Anyone can be hurt. You have to believe in your chin but you don’t want to be reckless. Marvin Hagler, who has possibly the best chin ever, was never reckless with his chin. He was always defensively responsible with his hands up. I’m not saying Brian didn’t keep his hands up. But going by him and his team’s attitude they didn’t believe Devin could hurt them and Devin hurting Brian is why they lost the fight. If you remember Brian won the first round. And then he was hurt badly in the second and after that it was a domino effect and it took Brian too long to get his footing back. By then, Devin’s lead was too big.
This disregard for Devin's power was puzzling to me because Brian has been hurt before and recently. In 2024 Janelson Bocachica dropped Norman. That was no flash knockdown. The fight was ruled a NC because of cuts. It was the fight directly before Norman won the title. Everyone seemed to forget about that performance because Norman went on a crazy hot streak with three straight KOs. But it was also the last time Brian fought a fighter who didn't engage him head on.
However, with a few small adjustments I think Brian Norman can be champion again. There is some good to take from the fight. Now he has the experience of going 12 rounds with an elite fighter. He also didn't get stopped. He fought through his tough moments and he kept trying. I believe he can win another by the end of 2026 if he doesn't harp on this loss.
Hey Breadman. In a previous mailbag you mentioned that Lubin looked like he hadn’t rehydrated properly. What does proper rehydration actually look like? Is it generally the same throughout boxing, or does it vary from fighter to fighter? What exactly do you do with your fighters in terms of rehydration? And what about meals between the weigh-in and the fight—what does that usually consist of? PS. How Bout Them Cowboys! Thanks in advance! God bless
Bread’s response: Yes I know the Cowboys just beat the Eagles. They’re looking very good. But typical of a Cowboys fan, talking too much, too soon… You do know how the last 30 years have went…
I’m not going to get into what I do for rehydration. That’s a competitive edge I can’t give up publicly. But I can talk about what proper rehydration looks like. A fighter who is properly rehydrated looks different than he did the day before at the weigh in. His abs look good but they look smoother and aren’t as defined. His face and eyes don’t look as sunk in. They look fuller. The eyes look like they have more life and less bags under them. The face and cheeks also look fuller. His overall body looks slightly bigger but less cut. I hope I was able to explain it to you so you can get a visual because oftentimes I just know the look without articulating it verbally.
Give me your 10 best match ups for the next upcoming year.
Bread’s Response: Just how I like it. Nice and short. I’m going to give you the 10 best match ups of what I think are the best fights and most historically significant all the while being realistic and or makeable.
Monster vs Junto
Crawford vs Boots
Boots vs Ortiz
Usyk vs Kabayel
Usyk vs Itauma
Benavidez vs Bivol
Benavidez vs Beterbiev
Fundora vs Xander
Mason vs Schofield
Shakur vs Cruz
Send CONCISE questions and comments to dabreadman25@hotmail.com
