The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen 'Breadman' Edwards tackling topics such as the Canelo Alvarez vs. Gennadiy Golovkin trilogy, Terence Crawford vs. Errol Spence, Claressa Shields vs. Savannah Marshall getting postponed, and more

How do you feel about the postponement of the Women’s card this weekend? Has anything ever happened like this in Sport’s History? Do you think the postponement is too long, giving the new date is October 15th? Who does it benefit? How would you handle it if you were training one of them?

Bread’s Respone: You have to respect the laws and customs of the land. I’m sure the fighters and their teams are frustrated but they have to be respectful of the Queen. After all the fight is in the UK because that’s where the big fan base is. 

When the 911 attacks occurred I had tickets to go see Bernard Hopkins vs Felix Trinidad. The original date was September 15th. So when the fight was postponed to September 29th I was buying a new house and closing on September 28th and to get up to NY the following day was rough on me. I still tried to go but NY was not letting 1 passenger vehicles in because of the bomb threats. So in my lifetime, the 911 attacks are the biggest thing that I’ve seen where an event was postponed. Maybe it stands out because it directly affected me. 

Although Hopkins was the natural middleweight I always felt the postponement benefited him because he was used to being at the lower weight and holding it. Where as, Tito was a guy who was known to blow up in between fights. I’m not suggesting the great performance by Hopkins was due to the postponement. It’s to Hopkins credit he’s more disciplined. But you’re asking me a question….

I wasn’t born yet but I was told that the NFL still played after JFK was assassinated. There were varying opinions on whether they should have or not. In this recent case of the Queen passing, it wasn’t an act of violence and or an assassination so I know I’m not comparing apples to apples. It’s slightly different and we are talking about Royalty. I’m just trying to think of similar scenarios where sports was impacted. 

As for Shields, Marshall, Mayer and Baumgarner…I actually think Oct 15th is FAIR and here is why. I know it’s 5 weeks but it gives the ladies a chance to let their bodies settle. I don’t know who out of the ladies struggle to make weight. But I do know that most fighters of this era, come down from 20lbs-30lbs. So if that’s the case with the ladies and they have to make weight scientifically and unnaturally then 5 weeks gives them all a chance to reboot. So the postponement may suck for the fans, but it is fair in terms competition. You also have to factor in travel. 3 of the 4 participants in the main bouts live in the US. So they have to go home. Get adjusted again and then get back to work. 

It’s not fair to ask them to stay in the UK for 5 more weeks without their resources. So as much as everyone was looking forward to this great event. October 15th is reasonable postponement date because if one of the ladies had to make weight the new scientific way, then rehydrate over 10% of their body weight, it’s not healthy to hold the weigh in weight for a significant amount of time.  

Personally, I would let my fighter, fight a closed door live fight on Saturday. Not without headgear because of cuts but live work. Because dogs have to eat. Once a fighter peaks out, they want to fight. It’s hard to describe in words but they just need it. I’m not sure if that’s possible for these ladies but if it was possible, I would get the liveliest sparring I could, maybe some 10 or 12oz gloves in head gear, and get busy for about 6 rounds. Go home. Take 2 days off for travel, then get back to work. The get back won’t be hard because you won’t have time to waste and a 3 week camp then a 1 week taper will peak them out again. I’m sure their coaches know how to get it back. And everyone will have their own method of peaking out again.

Hi Bread, you wrote a lot about clutch fighters in the last few weeks and also about fighters going on a tough run of fights. I would like to know your opinion of where Carl Froch sits in these categories? His run from Jean Pascal through to the end of his career was pretty solid by modern standards (Minus a mandatory V Yusaf Mack).He never looked like the most talented fighter and seemed slow and clumsy at times but he was better than the sum of his parts and always found away to get it done. Other than Ward he never lost big but Ward was on a different level from everybody at SM. After that he put his career on the line against an undefeated Lucian Bute and had the performance of his life. He also had a couple of victories where he was losing big before coming from behind and stopping Jermain Taylor and George Groves. That feels like the definition of clutch?

Keep up the good work. Steve.

Bread’s Response: Carl Froch was super clutch. I wasn’t the biggest fan of Froch because in interviews he would always say negative stuff about Muhammad Ali. And I love Ali, so that sort of turned me off on Froch. But objectively as a fighter, Froch is a top 10 Super Middleweight ever. He had iron will. Superior conditioning. Underrated IQ. Wiry Physical Strength. And Steel nerve. Carl Froch didn’t look great but he was. Looking at him he seemed very beatable. But only 2 fighters were able to do it and he got revenge on one of them in Mikell Kessler. 

Froch absolutely put his career on the line vs Lucian Bute. He came out of the Super 6 with 2 losses and Bute was the only notable Super Middleweight that didn’t enter the competition. Froch completely exposed an undefeated Bute. Bute was in lots of P4P top 10 and Froch just smelled something on him. I wasn’t shocked that Froch won, I was shocked at how violent and one sided the fight was. Frcoh beat Bute up so bad, Bute never exercised his rematch clause for a return fight…..

The thing about Froch was he was a BIG GAME hunter. He wasn’t a dynamic fighter and I’m not sure if it was on purpose or not in terms of matchmaking. But all around fighters need stiff competition to show their intangibles. So all he did was go after BIG GAME. I don’t blame him. He believed in himself and he didn’t need hot mitt matchmaking. He literally went after every notable Super Middleweight of his era. That’s how you do it. Froch is a clutch fighter. He’s a money fighter. He’s a winner. 

Hello Breadman,

A few things that maybe you can give feedback on. Looking forward the women's fight this week.  Any prediction. Shields vs Marshall. You said a lot of complimentary things about Caleb plant during the run up to Alvarez fight.  I wonder if he knew how you spoke highly of him at that time.  Did he know back then what you thought of his skills and did it have a bearing on you and him getting together. Your thoughts on Joshua vs Fury in December.  I think this can be good for Joshua.  Give him a chance to get back in everyone's eyes if he can pull the upset and he will be fighting a different type of fighter.  People might say too soon but he might need too soon.

 I know fury was really rooting hard for Joshua because of the money that fight would have brought in no matter what he said before the fight.  Fury says a lot. I think that Fury will beat Usyk convincingly if they fight.  No disrespect to Usyk.  I base that on I see Fury fighting Usyk as a southpaw which will neutralize what Usyk does because of how the right hand jab will be tough to get by and Fury is left handed I believe and I have seen him fight well left handed.   He will have power with his left hooks from the southpaw stance   Your thoughts on that and what you see with that fight. Robinson fought lamotta 5 times and people got their moneys worth each time.  I believe the best heavyweight fight out there is Fury Wilder 4.  Your thoughts on that.

Thanks again,

Rich Mathews

Bread’s Response: Robinson vs Lamotta did fight 5 times. But only once for a title in a Super Fight. There other 4 fights were non title affairs when they were prospects and contenders. Different era…

Usyk wants smoke. I don’t know if anyone in history can beat him EASY. And if they can, I would like to see them prove it. Usyk has a way about him where he raises his game accordingly. 

Quick Tip. Southpaws love fighting other southpaws it doesn’t throw them off. Have you see Erislandy Lara vs Austin Trout or Pernell Whitaker vs Juan Nazario. That won’t bother Usyk one bit. Fury will go in as the favorite, he will deserve it but Usyk is live.

I don’t know if Caleb Plant heard what I said about him or not. I just tell truth. 

Hello Breadman ,                            

I found your comments on sparring very interesting . It seems most fighters spar each other at some point. Even if they dont fight each other . Quality sparring would mean real opposition . But what happens if the sparring is too good . Does this ever happen , and what do you do if it does . I know you said you had Boots Ennis for sparring work . I would like to get your take on Carmen Basilio . Angelo Dundee was his trainer in the Robinson fights , Basilio won one and lost one . These were title fights . The second one where his eye was so badly swollen . Still he went thirty rounds with the best fighter ever . What got me was Basilio weighed in at one fifty three for both middleweight fights . If he were in his prime fighting today , he could challenge Jermell Charlo one fifty four.

How would Basilio do against Jermell at one fifty four , and Jermall at one sixty . He had to be one tough fighter . My last question is one of my favorite MM fights , Riddick Bowe vs Larry Holmes . Very interesting fight , your thoughts please.

Thank You, J.B

Bread’s Response: Elite fighters should have elite sparring. It doesn’t mean you’re fighting for your life every sparring session, but the work should be on the level. In camp you get some guys where they push your guy to the max. Then you get some guys where your guy can work on some things and not be under the gun so much. If the work is too tough you either see if you’re fighter can up his game. Or you stop working with the fighter who is too much for him. It’s a judgment call but you can’t be squeamish about it. It’s ok if your guy doesn’t get the better of every sparring session. 

You have trainers who post videos of sparring but they portray a fantasy world. No one gets the better of 100% of the sparring. They just don’t post those videos when they don't .

Carmen Basilio was a great fighter and a hard man. Yes he went 30 rounds with the great Sugar Ray Robinson. But I think Robinson was maybe 37ish so that matters but it doesn’t discount what Basilio did. I don’t like to compare fighters of different eras because Basilio fought in the same day weigh in era, The Charlo’s don’t. So for example Big Charlo is probably a lightheavyweight in the 1950s. With some fighters it’s easier to compare but with a guy like Basilio it’s tough because of his size and how he fought.

But for fighters his size, Basilio is a nightmare. He’s a complete animal that didn’t fatigue or discourage. Watch his fights vs Tony Demarco. That’s the highlight of his career. Basilo is an elite and better version of Arturo Gatti. He was on the Fight of the Year for 5 years in a row. Special fighter. Think of a mix of Shawn Porter and Gatti, but probably a little more crafty than both.

Hey Breadman - I need to speak up on behalf of Cris Arreola re: dropping and rocking Andy Ruiz. From writers to commentators to Andy himself; I don’t see them giving Arreola credit for showing up at 228 lbs and boxing responsibly vs Andy Ruiz. I also don’t think they give Arreola enough credit for his punching power. Ruiz says he was “trying to look the part” , others say he had an off night.  I think Arreola, under Joe Goosen, showed tremendous improvement and and surprised us all. What are your thoughts on this?

Cheers! Gabe

Bread’s Response: Joe Goosen is a great trainer. One of my favorites. I think Chris Arreola is a truth machine. He finds out what type of fighter you are. He finds out what level you’re at. Arreola is not a great fighter, but he’s a great test. He shows up and fights his heart out every single time. He’s dog tough and he’s mean. He’s a guy that you have to live in his era to appreciate because in 50 years, some analytic expert won’t be able to appreciate him because he didn’t see him live. I also want to give some props to Henry Ramirez who had Arreola earlier in his career. Often times the early trainers who embed certain things get forgotten.


Wanted to reach out to get your thoughts on Canelo-GGG III and really the entire trilogy of fights.  I'm admittedly a big GGG fan.  Have been since about 2014.  GGG won the first Canelo fight.  I know he didn't get the decision but I've watched it and scored it multiple times and nobody can convince me he didn't win that fight, and I haven't heard many genuinely argue against that point.  The second fight was obviously different.  I thought GGG came on enough late to edge it, but Canelo definitely won more rounds "clean" and with so many close rounds I can see how Canelo got the W. That being the backdrop, a couple of questions.  First, how differently is GGG viewed if he gets the decision he deserved in the first fight? Robbing him of that moment, especially after he had spent so long being ducked by Martinez and Cotto as the lineal MW champs (and even Canelo avoided him for a bit till he started to show a little slippage), is one of the great tragedies in boxing over the last decade or so in my opinion.  Second, how do I have legitimate hope of GGG winning this third fight?  

He's clearly slipped and Canelo has clearly improved.  Beyond the "puncher's chance" that comes with his power, I just can't see how GGG wins.   I actually didn't want this fight to happen because of that, though I'm glad GGG is getting one last big payday.  Outside of a George Foreman - Michael Moorer style KO where he lands the perfect punch at the perfect time, what can GGG do to win?


Bread’s Response: My initial gut reaction is the most truthful. In the 1st fight, I thought Canelo fought a good fight but he was too lazy and didn’t get off enough. I thought GGG landed his jab and his pressure was enough to edge it. 

In the 2nd fight I thought Canelo was winning. Then around the 9th round, GGG went on a historically underrated surge. I thought he won 3 rounds in a row 9, 10 and 11 but I thought Canelo won the 12th. I was at a fight party. Afterwards we were all asked who we thought won before the decision was announced. I said I think Canelo edged it with the last round. So that’s that. 

If GGG gets one of those wins, his legacy enhances but you hae to realize something. Canelo wouldn’t be rated so high if he lost. So the win wouldn’t be as big as it seems because we are looking at Canelo through an enhanced view at this point. Back in 2017 GGG was the favorite to beat Canelo. Canelo wasn’t viewed as an ATG back then. It’s what he’s done since including beating GGG. So that’s tricky to analyze. 

If GGG were to somehow win this fight it would greatly enhance him on all accounts. Canelo is not Michael Moorer. Canelo is much more elusive defensively and Canelo has shown an iron chin. If GGG were to clip him it would be monumental. The issue with that is Canelo seems to be able to take his punches because he can see them coming. Canelo’s counter punching TAMES GGG from opening up with his devastating punch variety. In my opinion GGG can’t wait on the George Foreman 1 hitter quitter. I think GGG has to turn into an animal. Stop being so calculated. And war it out with Canelo. Carry a pace Canelo can’t handle. Go to his BODY. And Be prepared to never fight again because he’s going to leave something behind in the ring. Force Canelo into exchange after exchange and make this fight look like Bobboy Chacon vs Bazooka Limon 4. 

GGG may get knocked out doing that. But Canelo processes faster in terms of offense and defense. Waiting and waiting and just using a jab, albeit a great one, won’t work anymore because Canelo knows how to fight him now. GGG has to be meaner. He has to be nastier. He has to go to Canelo’s body, hips and even cup. He has to be a vicious killer. GGG fights Canelo like he’s a boxer. The only time he turned into a killer was rounds 9-12 in Fight 2. Quite frankly he’s too nice to Canelo. It’s going to take a monumental effort that he may not have in him but I think that’s his only shot. Canelo’s stamina looks improved. It may be. But things have been going his way. Against Bivol he didn’t push late because things weren’t going his way. GGG has to challenge his stamina. Challenge his lungs. GGG needs to put a pillow over Canelo’s face and attempt to smother him. I don’t know if he can because his own stamina has been compromised lately but miracles happen everyday. I’m not picking GGG but I’m not counting him out either. I believe he’s a great fighter and sometimes the boxing Gods even things out.

Ssup Bread,

Thanks for answering my last week's question. Just to give more context, my question to Doug was about Hank Armstrong's era. There was a time last year when I spent back-to-back hours watching all his fights and videos available on YouTube. I was in awe of his cardio and I wrote to Doug about boxers in that era and their training methods cause modern boxers can't box with that intensity even dedicated 'S&C' coaches. During Hank's era, i.e., boxers often fought over 200 times in their career and their career average was 10 to 12 bouts a year. Hell, Hank retired in 1945 and fought 18 times in 1944. So, when I say old school, I was asking Doug about really old school guys who fought in the era of Hank Armstrong, Joe Louis, SRR and Pep. To this email Doug reverted by saying that my description of old school training methods is correct on all counts except sparring. He said that boxers in that era sparred very little and when I pushed back by saying that the best way of excelling in any pugilistic sport is sparring, he said that they didn't need to spar that much because they were practically fighting every 2 weeks.Can you throw some light on the training methods of the really old school guys like Hank and SRR? Did they spar much less like Doug said.

Regards, Saurabh

Bread’s Response: You didn’t explain it in detail when you first wrote in. Obviously if a fighter is fighting 10-15/year he doesn’t need to spar but so much because he’s fighting more often. But in order to get to that point he needs quality sparring so he can maintain that level of conditioning. 

Virgil Hunter once told me something that the old timers told him. A fighter only needs to get in shape, ONCE. After that he needs to STAY in shape. I think what Doug was referencing was that motto. I think it’s actually correct but in this era with the drastic weight cuts and infrequent fights it’s much harder to do.

Good evening Bread,

So, I've put £100 on GGG. Was that a wise move? Maybe not but I live with it. I'm not going to go into a deep analysis of both men's styles, partly because it would be presumptuous for me to lecture you about boxing, FCS, you're a trainer, you know far more about boxing than I ever could. Also, though, we've already had Golovkin v Alvarez 1 & 2 & somehow I can't see 3 being wildly different. I guess one of them could decide to impersonate Pernell & start dancing backwards round the ring with his hands down but I don't think that is likely.

I honestly think GGG has established a psychological edge over Canelo. He has been cool, composed, sure whereas Canelo has been lashing out wildly. Also, I keep remembering Leonard v Hearns II. Leonard had a lot of different possible fights on the table after Hearns. Tommy didn't have any other irons, or any different fires, he had a passionate wish to even up with SRL & there wasn't anything else.  I kinda see GGG putting on Canelo what Tommy put on SRL. The massive difference is that SRL had the heart of a lion & survived & pulled out a draw, though I thought Tommy won. I don't think Canelo has that much heart. I see GGG winning by late stoppage or wide decision.

Anyway, your thoughts Bread?

Bread’s Response: It’s possible that GGG pulls a Hearns. The difference is Tommy was 30 when he fought his rematch with Leonard. GGG is 40……But let’s see. 

Hey Bread, Just saw The Ring has a customary survey of experts and the field is going 20-0 for Canelo.  All due respect but as an article it made for boring reading, no one is thinking outside the box by even raising any what ifs or x factors, everyone going chalk. GGG not boiling off 8 pounds at this stage is an x factor, he’ll either feel not himself or more likely it will help his superior volume even more along with his already stout punch resistance. Don’t get it twisted, the hate is mutual between these two, what if GGG’s yearning to right the historical record is be greater than the hate Canelo is bringing.  Having more time left in the sport may keep Canelo from following GGG into the deepest of waters.  What if GGG summons one last push and finally starts going to the body?  I’m obviously biased (haha) but wanted to get your thoughts on these or any other factors you think may make this fight interesting. Thank you, Adam – Whitby, Canada

Bread’s Response: GGG’s heart and will power are underrated. I have seen him under more duress than gets talked about but he always responds. I have seen him labor with his breathing, yet he never gets stopped late. He has an iron chin but he’s been buzzed by shots to the head and body. Brook, Devrenchenko and Canelo have all hurt him. He just refuses to stay hurt.

I just feel that the fight that GGG needs to fight, a frenetic, vicious fight…Is not a style that 40 years have fought throughout history. Chavez, Fenech, Duran, Frazier, Marciano…..You name the come forward sluggers in history. None of them have fought this type of fight at 40. I’m not saying GGG can’t. I’m saying it hasn’t been done. GGG has never been a speedster but he’s lost some speed. So boxing from the outside is a tough task also. I’m also a GGG fan. But this is a tough fight for him at this point. Despite Team Canelo waiting him out. Canelo was NEVER over his head vs GGG. They just wanted to make sure he had a better chance to win. But now that 5 years have passed since their first fight. I feel like if GGG were able to win this one, it would be one of the more historic wins in recent history. GGG would go from a HOF to ATG. That’s how big it would be.

It seems that many experts have already decided the outcome of Canelo-GGG 3.It seems like they decided the outcome somewhere around the time Golovkin fought Derevyanchenko. I’m not as sure as the experts are about the outcome of this fight… because of Golovkin’s jab. Fighters who excel past the age of 35 usually have a great jab. It’s also hard to get blown out in a fight if you have a great jab. I think Golovkin’s jab keeps this fight really close. I would love to hear your take.

Bread’s Response: You’re correct but you’re leaving some things out. GGG does have an ATG jab. His jab has kept him in both fights with Canelo. It’s actually the only punch he lands consistently. But and this is a big but. GGG may not be the better long range fighter. Canelo’s punch release and speed from the outside are troubling for GGG. Often times the great jabbers you speak of can keep fighters at long range and minimize the contact and incoming. Where as GGG is only 5’10. He can hit Canelo with a jab abut he doesn’t keep him at range and tame him with it. So you’re concept is correct but you’re not taking into consideration the match up between these two. I would love to see GGG win. I’ve been a GGG defender for quite some time now. But I think he needs more than a jab. I think he needs his whole tool box and especially his body punching. GGG used to brutalize fighters to the body but it’s not something he’s done in a very long time. Canelo is a truck that’s going to try to run GGG over. GGG needs to try to flatten those TIRES. Go to his body!

Hi Bread,

I have a question for you regarding boxing styles and how they relate to a fighters skills and temperament.I have been following a lot of fight breakdowns from the social media “experts” recently, and have noticed that many people believe that a fighter like Errol Spence fights an aggressive, come forward style because he lacks the skills and athleticism necessary to box and move for 12 rounds. What do you think of the boxing community’s tendency to typecast fighters? Doing so I think makes us miss “True Gift”attributes that make fighters truly special. For example: Andre Ward is thought of as a “boring” defensive fighter, but against Bika, Dawson, and Kovalev etc. he successfully applied the “gun in the room” theory, controlling the midrange and fighting aggressively on the inside. SRL is thought of as a classy boxer, but his grit and dead game temperament truly separated him in the biggest fight of his life against Hearns. Juan Manuel Marquez was thought of as a textbook technician, but in Pacquiao 4 he showed the ability to sit down and deliver one punch power. To me his power and toughness were always underrated.

These are examples of Boxers who’s temperament is to fight. We didn’t know they could fight in different styles until the right opponent placed them in the competitive circumstance where they had to adjust and reveal another layer to their game. Can’t the opposite also be true? Fighters we think of as great pressure fighter can poses elite boxing skills? To me it seems like Errol’s true gift is his boxing ability. In essence he takes the play away from his opponents. He outboxed fighters like Algeri, Lamont Peterson, Brook, Mikey and Ugas which leaving them sitting ducks at the mercy of his volume, pressure, and variety (his other great gifts). This is probably why he caused Floyd trouble in sparring. I don’t know who wins Spence Vs. Crawford, but I can tell you many people are breaking the fight down all wrong. Going in, Spence is the superior boxer at 147 pounds, and Crawford is the superior power puncher.


Bread’s Response: Good comment. I feel as though the people who label fighters are often times lazy, or misinformed. I think the common labels in boxing are not expansive enough. Boxer puncher, pressure fighter, slick, pure boxer and slugger are the usual labels without in depth details.

Andre Ward is not boring. He neutralizes his opponents offense and the fights become one sided because they can’t figure it out. So instead of criticizing the opponents, the media criticized Ward. My description of Ward, would be a hybrid, volume scoring, neutralizer. Ward is constantly scoring points and not giving up any. He fights at every range and every temperament. Inside, outside and mid range. He can box calm and he can be violent. His style is extremely fluid. Instead of complimenting him someone will call him a boring defensive fighter because they lack knowledge to articulate what they’re looking at. The word dominant should be used instead of boring. 

Sugar Ray Leonard is a flashy, athletic, versatile, ultra fast boxer puncher, with an extreme killer instinct. Calling him a classic boxer isn’t enough.

Juan Manuel Marquez, is a big punching, combination counter puncher who’s extremely resilient. 

Onto Errol and Terence. I’ve been saying Errol can box WITH Terence. I don’t know if can OUTBOX Terence but he can box WITH him. Terence is in my opinion is a great boxer but he doesn’t box on the level of Whitaker and Mayweather. What makes Crawford so special is his master adjustments, ability to land shots fighters don’t see and his finishing ability. Watch his fights with Jose Benavidez and Hank Lundy….

Errol doesn’t get credit for his boxing because it’s not fancy. He’s not making a bunch of pretty moves. He’s not super fast. He’s not punching in rapid fire combinations. So his boxing is steady, solid and basic but it’s still exceptional. And because he comes forward and he scores a lot of kos, he’s labeled more puncher than boxer. 

Errol’s moniker reminds me of how Marvin Hagler was viewed. Hagler was a big puncher but if you watch him early in his career, he was a boxer, who happened to have an iron chin, a big punch and excellent finishing skills. So when he kod Hearns in that savage fight, everyone forgot he could box. 

Errol can definitely box. But because Crawford is smaller, faster and flashier with his punches he’s viewed as the boxer in this fight. This fight has a little Leonard vs Hearns feel to it. With Leonard being Crawford and Spence being Hearns. My question in this fight is not who’s the better boxer. My question is can Errol take Terence’s punches. Often times when a fighter turns into a ko machine, his flaws get hidden or overlooked. I don’t think Crawford has many flaws. He’s as a good as an all around fighter as we have to day. But he does lose rounds. He does start a little slow. And he can be outboxed in spots. So my question is what if he can’t hurt Errol and he’s losing those same rounds? Often times when Crawford makes his adjustments, simultaneously he hurts the opponent so the climate of the fight changes. If the climate doesn’t change and Errol is outboxing him I wonder what happens. Maybe the master adjuster in Crawford goes next level and outboxes Errol. Who knows…This is why they fight the fights. I’m very curious. I wish this was a 15 round fight. 12 rounds is not enough separation. They need 15 to decide this. 

You called it! Spence vs Crawford was just announced by Mike Coppinger for November 19th. Everyone had all of their theories and you kept yours. Let the experts figure it out. Good call. Now that the fight is basically done what do you think the hold up was? Where do you think it will be? And who will be the favorite?

Bread’s Response: Thanks but I just don’t live in a fantasy world. I know I’m not that important in Spence’s and Crawford’s world to make up lies on why the fight hasn’t happened. People have actually made up stories with no inside info as far as what were the hold ups, who was ducking who, etc  etc. There is too many things to even write concerning how these type of fights get made. I’m humble, I have never even been a part of something so big. But here is what common sense tells me. 

Let the experts figure it out. And if Errol and Terence want to fight bad enough, they will instruct their team members to get the fight done, or lose their jobs. It’s really that simple. As far as who was holding it up. I don’t want to place blame. I think what happens is with a fight of this magnitude, with so much money being generated from so many different places, as the fighter you want to make sure the risk is worth the reward. Both fighters know they can LOSE, so they want to make sure they get every available dime. They also want to know what the other guy is making. As these things happen, both and their teams are learning. This is a learning process because Errol and Terence have also never been a part of anything so big. Fans and media just aren’t patient. And they feel the need to be right, depending on who they like more.

 I think the fight will be in Vegas. I think the betting will be 50/50. Crawford will probably be -120. Spence -110. More people I know favor Terence but this fight is very, very close. Errol impressed everyone with his last performance.

Send Questions to