The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards tackling topics such as Terence Crawford, Shane Mosley vs. Felix Trinidad, Vasiliy Lomachenko vs. Floyd Mayweather at 130-pounds, and more.
Aside from Pac, do you think there is anyone in the top 10 welters that could make the HOF as it stands today? I don't mean HOF worthy talent but HOF resume. I want to get your thoughts because the division is stacked and I think there are several HOF worthy talent like Bud, Spence, and Thurman but none have developed a HOF resume. I think it's a shame since the youngest of the top guys is Spence at 30 and the others are 31-32. Looking at Floyd's and Manny's resume, by 32 Floyd had just beaten JMM and Manny beaten Mosley. Legacy wise, these top welters today are leaving a lot on the table, specially Bud and Spence who are top 3 or 5 P4P.
Bread’s Response: Terence Crawford is a HOF if he never fights again. He may not have a HOF resume at 147. But he has a HOF resume OVERALL. Undefeated 3 division titlist, who unified one division completely and is a consensus top 3 or 4 P4P guy is a HOF in any era. Anyone who accomplishes what Crawford has and is as highly regarded as Crawford is, is a HOF.
This is era is just different overall. The fighters establish their credentials LATER. In the 80s Leonard, Duran, Hearns and Benitez were all HOF by 30. Some by 28. In the 90s Whitaker, Chavez, Tito, Oscar, Roy Jones and James Toney were all HOF before 30..Now it’s just not like that overall. There are some guys like Monster Inoue, Canelo and Chocolatito who were already HOF in their 20s but for the most part the fighters wait longer these days. I actually think it’s why we don’t see the SPECIAL PEAKS because they start taking a lot of the legacy fights when they’re slightly slipping and don’t realize it.
For example I think Errol Spence was ready to fight and would have been the favorite over every PBC welterweight in 2015. He was 25 and he was READY in my opinion. He didn’t get his title shot until 2017. He got some big PPV vs Shawn Porter and Mikey Garcia but now with extra wear and tear of making 147 and his accident, his legacy may not be what it would have been had he got his shot earlier. It’s best if you take your big fights when you are at your best or close to it. I’m not suggesting Spence is not at his best anymore. But in other eras, fighters of his caliber weren’t made to wait until their late 20s. I think if it was up to Spence he would have rolled and fought. But it’s just the logistics and overall energy of this era. In some cases fighters need more time but overall I don’t like it. It cuts years off of the PEAK years.
Hey Bread, long time reader and fan of the bag. I often wonder how you go about picking what questions you will post and where do you draw them from? I read the comments under your mailbags and you have a few loyalist who always support but there are about 4 or 5 guys who really troll you. They go by fake names like Young Bidness and Uncle Alvarez, yes I’m putting them on blast because there is a racial undertone to their comments. Do you post their comments or is it even up to you?
Bread’s Response: Ok where do I start…
In this last week I have been getting an overload of questions. Literally about 50/day. So my contribution to the Quarantine is to give you guys more content. But next week I will go back to my normal format of Saturday mornings to keep the exclusivity.
I usually just take the 5-7 best questions. I try to take the questions that will spark the most thought provoking rhetoric. Obviously popular fighters like Mayweather, Canelo, GGG etc will get the most shine. I also get to a point where I recognize the emails and I know the fans who really know the game and will ask good questions. I then try to take questions that aren’t more than a paragraph or two because the Editor and site limits how long a mailbag can be that’s why you guys got the extra edition last week. Last but not least the questions have to come in by Thursday because I send my mailbag in to the editor Thursday or Friday.
As for the TROLLS they can go jump off of a building onto a bike with NO seat. Who cares? I don’t read my comments section, it’s my mailbag I know what I wrote. I just check to see if it’s posted and to see if all of the questions made it and that’s it. I don’t draw any questions from the comments because I clearly state to email me and my email address is at the end of the mailbag.
In order to be a TROLL you have to be gutless. I know a troll personally. He’s a relative and in real life he’s a LOSER. A complete loser. You have to be in order to make up a fake persona on social media and insult other people with no accountability. I would never respect a person who has troll in them, they aren’t humans they’re characters who live in someone’s subconscious who only come to life because Social Media allows them to be cowards. That’s why I love that show where the guys go to a Troll’s place of work with fighters. It’s awesome. Because every single time the Troll acts like the coward they are.
If someone did research data on trolls and people who use the internet to stalk and insult people. I would bet 90% don’t make 6 figures. 90% have not accomplished much athletically. I’m talking just starting on a varsity high school team, they don’t have to be a star. 90% are not what you call ladies men. You know where I’m going with that. They’re mad that life hasn’t worked out for them the way they think it should have so they secretly attack. When you’re happy with yourself you don’t become so indulged with what others are doing to a point of obsession. You have your opinion and you keep it moving. I bet the trolls are reading this and saying to themselves, Bread is talking about me. Yeah buddy I am.
Unfortunately in this era, trolls play a big part of boxing. I personally block anyone I see trolling. But fighters are addicted to social media and they stay on social media when they shouldn’t and it affects their self esteem and subconscious to have to someone say mean and nasty things to them all time. But I’m 44 and I’m from a different era so I have the self discipline to self regulate what I see and don’t see. I NEVER read the comments section of my mailbag. EVER!
In fact a fellow trainer used to call me and tell me certain things that are said on youtube or twitter etc. And he would laugh at me because I used to cut him mid sentence and remind him I don’t pollute my brain with that garbage. The comments section is bad for the SOUL.
First off, I wanted to say I stumbled upon your mailbag 3-4 years ago and knew nothing about boxing. I've been reading intermittently since then, and largely via your commentary I've fallen in love with the sport and have learned a ton about boxing history, going back and watching old fights mentioned in your column. So thank you. I find it rather difficult to find good commentary and analysis in boxing, so I truly cherish your mailbag.
Lomachenko vs. Mayweather?
Whenever I size up current/past fighters in a hypothetical match up, I just can't see anyone giving Mayweather real problems or breaking down his defense/strategy. He keeps his distance against pressure/in-fighters and has superior quickness, accuracy and timing at range.
However, I think Lomachenko might have had the best shot. I think his footwork/quickness/IQ would allow him to get inside against Mayweather in a way no one else could and he has the accuracy/combinations/handspeed to do damage against Mayweather once he's there. If it's not Lomachenko, who do you think would have had the best shot against Mayweather?
I know this is not likely to come to fruition, but for the sake of argument... If Canelo were to unify the Super Middleweight division (Callum Smith, David Benavidez, Caleb Plant, Billy Joe Saunders):
1) Where would you put Canelo amongst the all time greats for his weight profile?
2) Would you bet on Canelo beating all 4 of these guys? (I know he'd be heavily favored for each individual matchup, but I'm asking about going 4 for 4)
3) Which do you think could give him the most problems?
Bread’s Response: Thank you.
I am very high on Loma and I think his streak at 130 was as good as I’ve ever seen. But 130lbs was Floyd Mayweather’s best weight also. Mayweather is an average size welterweight but he’s very big for 130lbs and he has freaky long arms. Floyd’s reach is 72inches. If you look at the tale of the tape in junior middleweight and higher weight fights they average a length of 70-72 inches. To put this in perspective Floyd has a longer reach than Andre Ward and Terry Norris. Two fighters who started out fighting at much higher weights.
Floyd gave junior lightweight fits with not only his cat quickness and elite skill but his length. A lot of junior lightweights hover from 5’5-5’7 and their arms don’t exceed 68 or 69 inches. He outjabbed the much taller Diego Corrlaes because he had superior length not just timing.
Obviously Loma has short arms(65 inch reach) but he’s used to not having length so his reflexes, feet, timing and physical strength compensate his lack of…But in a fight with Floyd where the athleticism and mental processing is equal then I think Loma’s lack of length would be an issue for him. I’m not picking Floyd with a bullet (60/40). But I would pick him to beat Loma. It’s a great fight though. It would be tough on both of them. But my guts tell me that the fight would have more rounds like the ones Linares won against Loma, than the rounds like Loma won against Linares. Floyd by decision.
If you’re asking me who would have the best shot to beat Floyd at 130lbs I would say no one. Most of the top guys around that weight are too young for me to say if they could handle Floyd. Overall who I think would give Floyd his toughest fight in the weight classes he competed…….
Um…..Stylistically 4 fighters stand out to me. Terence Crawford because I think he can think and process with Floyd. He’s not the natural athlete Floyd is but he’s close enough, conditioned enough and mean enough to take him to the brink. That fight is closer than people may think. Crawford’s mind is special.
Errol Spence is DOG strong. He has that constant jab. And he never stops going to the body. Floyd would have a tough time keeping Spence off of him in a real fight. Physicality would play a factor in this fight. Spence was an Olympian at 152lbs and Floyd at 125lbs. Spence has the strength of a strong junior middleweight.
Jarret Hurd. When Hurd is right he’s a load. He can really overwhelm you. You can outbox Hurd but if you aren’t strong enough to push him back or not give up ground he can drown you out. Think of the Maidana fight but with a 6ft guy who would outweigh Floyd by over 25lbs on fight night.
You guys will laugh at this but I believe Erislandy Lara would have been a nightmare stylistically for Floyd. Lara can match Floyd’s jab and length plus he’s bigger. I don’t think he’s better P4P but in a real fight Lara would have been a handful for Floyd a few years ago. He may have made Floyd lead and because he’s used to fighting bigger men I don’t know if Floyd could have walked him down like he did the smaller southpaw Zab Judah.
I’m not suggesting these guys could beat Floyd. I’m just saying they give him tough fights.
If Canelo ran the table at super middleweight he’s an ATG, the best Mexican fighter ever and a top 25 ever fighter. That’s some heavy work bro.
But here is the thing about who would be the favorite and who you bet on. If you asked me today I say Canelo would be the favorite. But fights aren’t fought like that. The totality of the fights in succession is what makes them tough. Every training camp is different. Every fight is different. So fighting those 4 guys in a short period of time would be something you have to assess on a fight by fight basis. You can’t pick ahead in 4 successive fights because too much can happen in each fight.
Every time a fighter fights killer back to back to back fights vs elite fighters in their primes, he has slip ups. Look at Ray Leonard when he ran Benitez, Duran and Hearns. He had a slip up vs Duran. Look at Pac when he ran Barrera, Marquez and Morales. He had slip ups. Look at Oscar when he ran Whitaker, Quartey, Tito and Mosley. It happens to everyone.
I know Canelo is GUN but I don’t think he will fight all 4 of those kids. It’s just heavy work. He may tell them to fight each other then the winner can fight him. But to fight all of them without them fighting each other is a stretch. And I wouldn’t knock him for that. They should fight each other. But I would love to see it if he did it.
The toughest match ups for Canelo would be Plant and Benavidez. Plant can box his butt off and he has the legs to make Canelo expend energy. Plant also does not make a lot of mistakes. That’s important because Canelo has evolved into a pressing counter puncher so he forces mistakes. Benavidez may be big, mean and nasty enough to stay in the box and fight Canelo off. But he has to sure up a few things first. I see Canelo really going to his body because of how high he stands up, his body would be a big target.
How you been Bread? I trust that you and your family are safe during this time. Please rank, based on performance, the following 50/50 type fights where one person ended up dominating the other. Any explanation for your ranking would be greatly appreciated.
Mayweather vs. Corrales
Hopkins vs. Trinidad
Chavez vs. Rosario
Barrerra vs. Hamed
Whitaker vs. Chavez
McGirt vs. Brown (the one I hate because Simon was my favorite back then. I actually met McGirt years later and told him I was still mad at him for that. He laughed)
Author of Never Stop: A Memoir
Bread’s Response: What’s up brother. All is well on my end.
Man you gave me some tough fights to rank. My goodness. What’s ironic is you picked 5 out of the 6 fights that I consider to be PERFECT. Ok these are my personal rankings in order and I will tell you why I’m ranking them in this order.
The reason I’m ranking them in this particular order is the significance of the win. How highly the opponent was regarded, where would the opponent be ranked historically if they won, the eyeball test and how good I regard the opponent at that EXACT time.
1. Hopkins vs Trinidad
2. Chavez vs Rosario
3. Mayweather vs Corrales
4. Whitaker vs Chavez
5. Barrera vs Hamed
6. McGirt vs Brown
I know Whitaker vs Chavez was 1 vs 2 P4P and although Whitaker fought great I didn’t consider that one of his perfect fights. Chavez had more moments than people admit in the 1st half of the fight. I also thought Chavez had slipped a little more by then.
I was a big fan of Mikkel Kessler and wanted to get your thoughts on him.
I always thought he didn't get the credit he deserved and was underrated, when it comes to the greatest super middleweights of all time (a weight class that doesn't have a rich and long history).
The Viking Warrior was a multiple-time super-middleweight world champion, having held the WBA title three times between 2004 and 2013, and the WBC title twice between 2006 and 2010. Overall record of 46-3, with his only losses to Andre Ward, Joe Calzaghe and Carl Froch in their hometowns! And he owns wins over Froch (a possible future HOF'er), along with other respectable super-middleweights - Manny Siaca, Markus Beyer, Eric Lucas, Brian Magee and Librado Andrade. What you say?
Bread’s Response: I will probably get criticism from people but Mikkel Kessler is a top 10 super middleweight ever and he has a real HOF case. Many are putting Carl Froch in with a bullet but I think Kessler is equal to him as a fighter with Froch having the slightly better resume.
I also noticed that Kessler’s only losses are to HOF fighters in their hometowns. That says a lot. Kessler was a gun.
Kessler never embarrassed himself with any of his performances. He was never stopped. He actually won the Super Middleweight title 4x. The WBA version 3x and the WBC once. He also fought in 2 unifications vs Froch and Calzaghe.
The eyeball test says Kessler had excellent balance. He was an excellent puncher. He had a good jab and sweet right hand. He was dog tough, he was well conditioned and he fought hard.
Again if Froch is the barometer for a Kessler level fighter I think they are pretty much even, slight edge to Froch. Ward beat them both and I think Calzaghe would have too. Froch does have the George Groves and Lucian Bute wins on his ledger…Both of their best wins are each other…. But Kessler doesn’t have any controversial wins. I thought Andre Dirrell won his fight vs Froch.
Kessler passes the eye ball test as an excellent HOF level fighter. He has longevity on his resume. He has good numbers with multiple title defenses and 4 different reigns. He also doesn’t have a bad drop off. The most important thing is you had to be a Great fighter in order to beat him. He’s not a 1st ballot HOF but he has a case.
Your column is great, and I wish you and Julian the best.
I am 50 and started watching boxing around the time of the Holmes-Cobb fight in 1982.
Not sure if you want to print this for your column in BoxingScene.
1) What is the brand name of Julio Cesar Chavez Sr.'s boxing shoes? He wore them in all his big fights, against Pernell, Meldrick, Hector, etc.....They seem to be more popular among West Coast fighters. You don't see them very often. I think Andre Dirrell wore them against Carl Froch.
2) I mentioned my age which might explain why I'm interested in the next question.....Have you ever heard of an early 80's JW named Steve Hearon? He fought out of Houston, Texas
In early 1983, he was ranked #1 by the WBC. He was due for a mandatory shot at Bruce Curry, who he had already knocked out a year or two before, Then, on the undercard of the Larry Holmes-Scott Framk (or the Marvis fight, I forget, apparently because I'm 50), he took a fight against a then unknown Lupe Aquino and lost on cuts.
He then lost his next fight on cuts and never fought again.
It turns out he had a pretty novel excuse.
His real name was John Davison (or Davis. I have the KO mag issue which mentions this.) He was apparently from Colorado and had escaped from jail there. He was implicated in the murders of several men. The KO article was from a 1984 issue which I still have and it mentioned that he was acquitted of these killings. However, I did some digging, and found this article.
Maybe you know some people from the Texas area, like Ronnie Shields, who remember him?
Take care of yourself, James
Bread’s Response: This is surely a different type of question. You guys have been overloading me during the Quarantine. But after this weekend I’m going to start getting back to once a week and just picking the best 5-7 Questions.
All I can say is WOW. I never heard of this story before. But it sure is interesting. I do know Ronnie Shields and I will ask him when I see him if he ever heard of Steve Hearon.
Big fan of your knowledge. I'm having problems trying to picture Trinidad vs Mosley in my head. I could see Mosley outboxing Tito with speed, little raids and movement, but could also see Tito controlling Shane with his jab and power...how do you see this one?
Bread’s Response: I’ve always favored Tito over Mosley. They sort of just missed each other. Tito left 147 when Shane was entering it. It would have surely been a great fight. Their styles meshed visually in my opinion. Both are high contact, violent fighters. I can see scenarios where both can win.
But I think on their best nights Tito’s hard jab would throw Shane off. Both are well conditioned but I think Tito is more focused on what he wants to do in the ring. Shane is faster but he’s a little frantic where is Tito is more steadfast and to the point. Both can punch but as you know the better puncher in a fight is the catcher not the pitcher. I think Shane has an all time chin. But my eyeballs and guts tell me that Shane is easier to discourage. Tito doesn’t get discouraged. Edge to Tito in a shootout for me.
Send Questions to firstname.lastname@example.org