In this week's typically enlightening Daily Bread Mailbag with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards, the row between Vergil Ortiz and Oscar De La Hoya is revisited, the violence of Jeff Chandler is relived and the best fight in history is revealed.
My question is about father/trainers. Brian Norman Snr has recently been removed as the head trainer of his son Brian Norman Jnr. And Senior has said in response he won’t be working in the corner in any capacity citing that he’s not going to go from the head trainer to someone’s assistant. And that someone is former trainer of the year Derrick James. I think Senior should be willing to do what’s best for his son and if stepping down and being the assistant is best for his son, then so be it. But I wanted your thoughts on it because I know you have worked with fathers in the past.
Bread’s response: This is a tough question but a good one. First off, I want to say congrats to Brian Norman Snr and Jnr. They won a world championship together and they made millions. That’s something to be applauded. They’ve also been the latest to debunk the father/son duo myth. It works, there have been too many father/son teams to win world titles over the last 20 years for that myth to be repeated.
Next I want to say there is NO right or wrong decision in this. I totally understand the Senior Norman’s decision to remove himself. Personally, it would be difficult for me to be an assistant on a team where I was formerly head trainer. I know some who have done it and it worked but for me personally it would be very difficult. Some will say that Senior should check his ego. But I say it’s more than ego. It’s your professional livelihood and dignity at stake.
Just think about it in relation to the workforce. If you were a supervisor, would you accept being a subordinate on the same exact job? I can’t think of one prominent trainer, who was once the head trainer, who then was demoted to an assistant on the same team he was the head trainer on, only to later rise to prominence as a head trainer again. I’m not saying it hasn’t happened, but I don’t know of a case where it has happened.
I believe that some trainers can handle that. And props to them for being wired in that way. But some trainers can’t handle it. And I’m not going to criticize Norman Snr for being honest and saying he can’t handle it or is not willing to handle it. I have personally seen fathers and/or trainers who are asked to step down as the head trainer and be the assistant on a team and I have seen those father/trainers sabotage what the head trainer was doing. The father/trainer no longer has to take the responsibility of being the head trainer so now they’re in a win/win situation. They can make decisions with ZERO repercussions concerning the outcome of the decision if it goes wrong. That happens more times than the public know. So in this case Brian Norman Snr is saying I will totally remove myself and let’s see how things go without me. I don’t have an issue with that. I would only have an issue if he stayed on the team and he undermined the head trainer.
In my personal experiences I have dealt with a fighter wanting to bring new people on to the team. Once I was asked to work with a trainer and the trainer would take an assistant role and it did NOT work. Me and the trainer didn’t clash but the fighter was just off the whole camp and didn’t connect with me like he did in the past. The trainer had different tactics than I had. It’s not a right or wrong thing, it’s a chemistry thing. Once you get your program you have to be careful with anyone tinkering with it. I’m not saying the new trainer made the fighter off in camp. But I will say, it didn’t help.
I also worked with a fighter whose dad accepted me being the head trainer and he the assistant. It worked good. But over time the dad made head trainer decisions behind the scenes, but I had to be publicly accountable for the dad’s decisions. No one in camp should have more say than the head trainer. It’s very counterproductive when there is no pecking order in terms of influence. It didn’t work and I had to remove myself.
I have also dealt with a fighter telling me he wanted to bring in a new trainer and I would have to work side by side with the new trainer. I removed myself and told him to just go work with the new trainer. The fighter had no connection with the new trainer and came back to me about two years later. The fighter couldn’t complete a camp with the new trainer and get to a fight. The fighter was different when he came back to me… People underestimate the fighter/trainer dynamic. It’s why I don’t get fighters always trying to short the trainer’s money after they start making a certain amount. That connection is as important as anything in the fighter’s career.
The best collaboration I've ever had was when a fighter told me he wanted another set of eyes on the team and I told him I would pick someone with whom I had chemistry. I picked a trainer that I talked boxing with all the time. I picked someone who was honorable and hungry to prove himself. It wasn't perfect but we had a really good run together. I think the reason we had a good run was because I was in on the selection of the new team member whereas in the other cases I didn't have the same amount of influence. Moving forward this is something that I've learned to navigate.
Now from Brian Norman Jnr’s perspective I understand why he wants a new trainer. He just lost to Devin Haney in a fight he expected to win. The fighter is the head of the team and if he feels he needs a change, he has a right to explore his options. But Norman Jnr had to realize that he's changing trainers after a loss, he's putting pressure on himself to be better without his father. Because if Norman Jnr doesn’t adjust and fix his mistakes after splitting from his dad then the public blame will shift. No one will be able to blame his father if he keeps performing at the same level without the father in the corner. Time always tells the truth.
I think the world of Derrick James as a trainer. I really think he’s the goods and I see why fighters flock to him. Let’s see if it works out. Everyone has a choice in this. And just because it’s not something you would do, it doesn’t mean it’s wrong. As long as everyone is respectful towards each other and there is no malicious intent, I don’t have an issue with either side of this.
Did you see the movie about Naseem Hamed? It showcases his relationship with his late trainer Brendan Ingle. Ingle allegedly made a handshake deal with Naz for 25 per cent of his career earnings when Naz was just a child. Obviously we know he went on to make millions and be a world champion but I wanted to know your thoughts on their relationship. Do you believe the 25 per cent was fair? What are your thoughts on Ingle’s sons cheering for Barrera when Naz lost to him? Do you think Naz treated Ingle fair? He once dropped him with a body shot after challenging him to spar.
Bread’s response: Another good question. I didn’t see the movie but I will try to answer you as best as I can. I don’t think it’s OK to make a hand shake deal with a child if that in fact happened. I don’t know how old Naseem Hamed was when they allegedly made their deal but no adult should make a financial deal with a child. The deal should be done with a parent or guardian if the child is not of legal consent.
As for the 25 per cent, if the deal was 25 per cent for just training I think that’s way too much. But if the deal involved training, managing, investing etc then it may have been fair. I have no idea what the deal consisted of but for context the head trainer usually takes 10 per cent. Especially if they had a fighter since childhood. Managers take anywhere from 5 per cent to 33 per cent. So hypothetically if Ingle took 10 per cent for being the trainer and 15 per cent for being the manager/investor and he had to invest for several years before Naz turned pro, and I’m not saying he was right or wrong, but I do understand his intent.
Individuals who invest in fighters often never become whole again in terms of the return on their investment. There are so many variables to consider. Number one is time. If you meet a fighter at, say, 10 years old and he doesn’t turn pro until he’s 20 and you finance all the traveling and equipment etc it becomes very expensive. More importantly, you basically worked for FREE for a decade. Then once the fighter turns pro a managerial contract does expire. No one can make a fighter sign a lifetime deal. Also, trainers often protect themselves with managerial/advisor contracts because trainers don’t have contracts.
So, when I say time is a factor, let’s say the maximum amount of time a fighter can sign with a manager for is 5 years, and let’s say the fighter is not ready or can’t get a title shot within those 5 years. The money is usually in the title shot, then title defenses. Let’s say the fighter’s biggest purse is only 50k and the manager is taking 25 per cent. Well, that’s only a $12,500 payday for a manager who has invested well over 100k for a decade. So now the manager has to pray and hope that the fighter has honor and loyalty. Because legally he doesn’t owe him anything after the contract is up. So, with a handshake deal, he must hope the fighter is honorable or else he may never make his money back. It’s very complex because not every kid turns out to be as good as Naseem Hamed. Actually, he’s an outlier.
So, before the public judges, you have to look at both sides of the coin. The manager/investor/trainer is usually the one who loses in this. If Ingle’s sons thought Naz did their dad wrong, I understand them cheering for Barrera. This is a vicious sport. And some people fake like they want the best for everyone no matter what transpired between them. And it’s just not true. If someone allegedly mistreats one of my parents, then I’m not going to root for them to succeed. I can’t be friends with anyone who doesn’t like my mother. I can’t befriend someone who doesn’t like my close friends or close family. So I get that. Again, I didn’t see the movie, I’m just going by your comments. But if that did happen, I understand why Ingle’s kids had an issue with Naz. From their perspective Naz left their dad and they felt like their dad built him.
I would have to see the context of the sparring. But overall I don’t believe it’s OK for a fighter to challenge a trainer to sparring. It’s just unethical and it clouds the dynamic between the two. No matter who gets the better of it, the relationship will be damaged. It’s just unhealthy in my opinion. A trainer has to conduct himself in a certain way where the fighter wouldn’t think about putting his hands on him. Mike Tyson could KO Cus D’mato within 10 seconds, but I will assume he loves and respects him too much to ever want to spar him.
Hey Breadman, Appreciate the time and effort you put into answering these! Some great fights this last weekend! Looking forward to some upcoming ones. You get a lot of historical questions - I’ve got a training one for you. There’s so many different kinds of training that a boxer can spend their time on. But time and energy are limited. Boxing, roadwork, jump rope, speed bag, core strength training, sparring, heavy bag, different types of bags, agility ladders, many kinds of strength training… Could you put these into tiers of importance or somehow speak on what to prioritize when it comes to a training regimen? Sincerely, Alex S.
Bread’s response: Out of things you named… Tier 1 would be sparring, heavybag and road work… Tier 2 would be jump rope, different bags and core training… Tier 3 would be strength training. You didn’t name pad work and shadowboxing. I would put shadowboxing in tier 1 and pad work in tier 2.
Greetings Breadman. First of all, happy new year and hope you and the family are well. 1. I’ve been watching fights since the mid 2000s and one thing I have always wanted to see more of, but unfortunately haven’t, is African world champions and stars. What do you think we can do as a continent to fix that? Also, who is the best/most skilled boxer to ever to come out of Africa? 2. There’s a lot of talk about who will carry this sport into the future. One person doing his work under the radar Bam Rodriguez. This guy passes the eye test and he’s very good at fighting as well as unquestionably tough. What is his ceiling in terms of weight and where does he factor in your P4P list? Finally, what is your favourite fight of all time and what fight would you recommend someone new to boxing watches first? Ali from Nigeria.
Bread’s response: Most of the top African fighters go to the other countries to build their careers. So while they do become champions they rarely become stars because they aren’t natives of the countries they’re being built in. I think the fix is simple but most likely difficult. Africa needs a prominent promoter who has ties to a huge network. That way African people can support African fighters, in Africa.
Bam Ridriguez is currently No. 3 on my P4P list. I think he’s terrific. I can see his ceiling being around 122lbs. I think he can be a star. He is already. But fighters his size have never carried boxing. There is a size bias when it comes down to who carries the sport. And no junior bantamweight has ever carried boxing.
My favorite fight of all time is Leonard vs Hearns I. It’s my favorite because of the stakes and drama. People don’t realize how big this fight was. Not just money. But stakes. You had an undefeated KO artist in Hearns from Detroit as a slight favorite, then you had an Olympic champion who had corporate America backing him from the Washington DC area in Leonard. You had Emanuel Steward a still young but aspiring legendary trainer who raised Hearns in the gym. And you had Angelo Dundee, the legend who came into camp because of his cornerman work the night of the fight for Leonard. You had Leonard the WBC champion vs Hearns the WBA champion. You had Hearns the puncher vs Leonard the boxer. Leonard was the fighter of the year in 1979. Hearns was the fighter of the year in 1980. They were fighting not just for the welterweight title, but also they were fighting for the title of the world’s best fighter. The fight went in ebbs and flows. First Hearns, then Leonard, then Hearns, then back to Leonard. You had drama with Hearns leading on the cards but Leonard coming on strong in the championship rounds. Then you had the dramatic finish. I get chills thinking about.
What’s up Bread? Hope all is well and I’ll get right to it. Oscar De La Hoya demanding a 60/40 split in Vergil Ortiz’s favor to fight Boots Ennis is (a) a creative way to duck, (b) good business, or (c) something else? William, West Palm Beach.
Bread’s response: For now I’m going to say (c), something else. I’m a little confused at why Ortiz’s promoter doesn’t want his manager to negotiate Ortiz’s purse. But I don’t know their arrangement so I won’t criticize anyone at this moment. If the promoter is doing the negotiations for the fighter, then what exactly is the manager doing to earn his percentage? From my experience the network/investor puts up the money for the fight. It’s called a Rights Fee. That Rights Fee goes to the promoter. After that the manager negotiates how much his fighter gets out of the Rights Fee. Keep in mind the promoter has to make something – it's why the money goes through their hands first.
The infrastructure "seems" different now because now everyone is flocking towards whoever the investor is and they’re negotiating how much each side gets. For example, let’s say an investor says they will put up 8m for Ennis vs Ortiz. Now the promoters have to negotiate who gets more. Ortiz vs Ennis seems like a 50/50 fight in terms of splits but it’s a team’s right to try get the most money possible. I would have to look at how well Ennis and Ortiz sold as main events. Not only the amount of people, but how much each event generated. Then obviously you look at their accomplishments and their public regard. These things have to be looked at forensically to prove your stance. Hopefully they get it worked out. The one thing I will say is I don’t believe the previous offers were legit. Because if Team Ortiz is demanding 60/40 now after Ennis unified belts at 147. And if there isn’t enough money for them to fight Ennis now. What were the demands in 2024 and 2025?
Hi Breadman,Who do you have for the Muratalla vs Cruz fight, and what method? Separately, I believe you previously mentioned you liked Benavidez against Zurdo, how about Benavidez vs Opetaia? Thanks.
Bread’s response: I do like Benavidez to beat Zurdo by decision. I can’t call Benavidez vs Opetaia just yet. Let me see how Benavidez looks at cruiserweight vs Zurdo. I like Andy Cruz by UD.
Bread, Fair response [regarding De La Hoya’s comments] IMO. I also think they should've left Boots alone and don't agree with any of the previous behavior. De La Hoya, unfortunately, seems to like engaging in dysfunction. They probably thought Boots would stay at 147 to become undisputed and Ortiz's image would have gained a boost from those antics. Now that Boots moved up and is calling their bluff, they have essentially trapped themselves. The “Monster" is coming for them. Ortiz appears to be a warrior so wants the fight. The stage is set for this match, but I still wouldn't take it if I'm managing or promoting Ortiz. I also would never have called him out. We both agree that Boots will probably win the fight. That defeat could literally change the course of Ortiz's career. He could be damaged goods afterwards, and that is the reason why I would wait. Simba
Bread’s response: You’re agreeing with me but you’re moving the goal post. The reason why Ortiz should fight Ennis next, is because he called him out. That’s the main reason. You don't call someone out to let the fight build more. When you call someone out, you should be ready to fight them next. If you say you would NOT have called him out, then you are not contextualizing what happened.
Ortiz called Ennis to the ring, he literally said “Boots come here!” The crowd went crazy. Social media went crazy. At this point you have to fight! No one made Vergil call Boots out. He did what he wanted to do. I wouldn’t say a word if Team Ortiz had the stance of ‘Let Vergil win a title build up his legacy with a few title defenses then we will fight Ennis’. That’s logical and, most important, it's honest. But it's too late for that now because there is pressure to deliver a fight after they got everyone worked up. The public is the paying customer and you can't do that to the public without fighting.
Hey, do you think Moses Itauma might be picking his fights rather than taking risks. If I'm correct he's chosen not to fight Frank Sanchez or Agit Kabayel for a number 1 spot. I'd love to see him in with Zhilei Zhang too, that would be a great test. Thanks, Mike
Bread’s response: I suspect they’re taking their time with Itauma. I have no issue with that. I don’t mind slowing a rising contender down. I have an issue with slowing a champion down. Once you become champion you should be available to all contenders and adaptable to all styles. I think Itauma is the goods but that’s just an eyeball test. Who knows what his team knows about him? Or maybe they just want him to get a couple of more years of maturity. They’re doing good with him. I just wished Itauma fought more often. I think he should be on a four-fights-per-year schedule until he’s at least 20-0.
Fighting Sanchez is one thing. But going after Kabayel is a very dangerous move in a non-title fight. Kabayel is serious business and deserves a title shot vs. the great Usyk. He’s earned it. If Itauma’s team went after Kabayel the criticism they would take would be unbearable. Let’s see how Itauma moves over the next few years before we criticize him for his opponent selection.
Hey Bread, Season’s Greetings from AU. Just a quick question after reading the article on DLH comments on Ortiz v Boots. Since when did promoters start making the call on fights and purse splits? Isn’t that the manager’s job? I’ve noticed for a few years now Eddie Hearn, Frank Warren, Oscar commenting on other fighters not under their promotional banner, and I’d like to see managers doing just that and putting promoters back in their lane promoting their fights. All the best, DC
Bread’s response: I thought the same thing. I don’t want to stick a post in the ground and take a side on this. But I always thought the manager negotiated the fighter’s purse and the promoter, promoted the fight. To hear Ortiz’s promoter say he was negotiating the fight for Ortiz was a different protocol than I’m used to seeing. I would love for Ortiz’s manager and promoter to openly discuss what agreement they have so we can get clarity. What I do know is the Ali Act prevents a manager from simultaneously being a promoter of a fighter because they have different functions and if the same person tries to be both at the same time, with the same fighter there can be a conflict. But no one has ever had any real repercussions for not following the Ali Act. I’m curious to see how this plays out, we will all learn something after this is over.
Hi Breadman, I really appreciate your praise for the great Vasiliy Lomachenko over the years, which you revisited in your most recent mailbag with typical astuteness. I agree with every single word you wrote. I include Loma amongst a special class of five individual fighters who, since my time as an obsessive follower of the sport since the mid ‘80’s, I believe get consistently devalued all too often. The other are Sumbu Kalambay, Buddy McGirt, Ike Quartey and Jeff Chandler. And then it dawned on me. Being a Philadelphia man yourself, what are your thoughts on Chandler? Has anyone asked previously? His title defence against Gaby Canizales is one of my favourite 118lb performances in history, a great champion in a great era for the sport, even if the drop off was alarmingly sudden, and it amazes me that he reportedly had zero amateur fights! Mark, UK
Bread’s response: Jeff Chandler is one of the best fighters ever from Philadelphia. He has a case for being our greatest small man ever. He was an awesome fighter. Just a strong all-round technician. A guy who could do a little bit of everything. Jeff is also one of the best bantamweights ever. And he’s most likely a top 5 American bantamweight.
My favorite fight of Chandler’s was against Johnny Carter “The Dancing Machine”. Philadelphia is very geographical. And while both were from South Philly, Carter had strong ties to Southwest Philly. My grandmother lived off of 58th Street in Southwest Philly, which was its most popular area in the 1980s. Carter had a unique high-top fade with a part going through it at the top. See Meldrick Taylor's haircut vs Chavez for a visual. The whole neighborhood copied his haircut. We all tuned in to see Chandler vs Carter, it was a huge local fight.
I rooted for Carter because my aunts and uncles were friends with him. But Chandler proved to be what he was. A money fighter. Money fighters come through in the biggest moments when everyone is putting their money up. Because Carter beat Chandler as an amateur and because Carter was from such a popular area, there were many people who thought Carter would win. But Chandler was having none of it. He stepped right to Carter and stopped him in 6 rounds. Man, Jeff Chandler was a bad boy. I implore anyone and everyone to watch that fight.
Jeff ruled the division for four years with nine title defenses. Ironically, one of the reasons I call Jeff a money fighter is, after he won the title he took a draw in a title defense and a loss in a non-title fight. He avenged both with KOs in title fights. I really don’t know why Jeff was done at 28 years old. I don’t know him personally to comment in specific detail. But bantamweights in the 1980s didn’t last until their mid 30’s. Jeff also had a detached retina. I’m not sure when it happened but I know he had vision issues. And if you look at his style. It was just rough. He wasn’t really a pressure fighter but his style causes lots of wear and tear. Jeff was technically proficient but he fought with violence.
Nevertheless, Jeff Chandler is a legitimate ATG bantamweight and Philadelphia fighter.
Send CONCISE questions and comments to the dabreadman25@hotmail.com
