By Stephen "Breadman" Edwards
The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards discussing topics such as Daniel Jacobs' victory over Luis Arias, the heavyweight unification between Anthony Joshua and Deontay Wilder, Vasyl Lomachenko vs. Guillermo Rigondeaux, and more.
Last week you commented, you expected a competitive bout, Jacobs vs Arias. Can you tell me, did this bout live up to your expectations? How would you grade Jacobs performance? You may be correct, your opinion last week as well, Danny is better vs better competition even though I don't see Danny winning versus the better competition, names included below.
Would you agree, Eddie Hearn, during his post bout interviews showed some disappointment, very discreetly that the KO didn't happen? I think he expected a Danny KO 100%.
Would you agree, Danny looked great physically although, his punching accuracy was ineffective? Also, on the same night with Arias, do you agree with me the following fighters score KO's vs Arias?
I'm confident also, Crawford and Spence score KO's vs Arias.
Thank you for your feedback!
Bread’s Response: I thought Arias would do a little bit better because I think Jacobs fights better as an underdog. I thought Jacobs fought well. He was strong and fast and he discouraged a really motivated undefeated fighter.
I think everyone thought Jacobs would ko Arias. But as you know I didn’t. What did surprise me a little bit was Arias went into survival mode a little bit. But I’m going to give him a break and here is why.
Arias has been severely under promoted in his career. He was an Olympian level amateur who was never the main event on any small televised tv fights. So with almost 20 fights to his name he gets a call for Danny Jacobs. Arias is smart. He knows how his career was going. So he “talked” the fight up. I don’t see anything wrong with that. He wasn’t disrespectful. So he convinced some people including me that he would do a little better than he actually did. Looking at the fight I think Arias was missing about 2 levels of development fights. Every man knows what they have in front of them. Jacobs was really strong and fast and Arias could feel it early on. 99% of fighters in history will not walk into a certain concussive conclusion. Joe Frazier is an anomaly. He walked right into George Foreman in 2 fights. After the 1st fight you would think that Frazier would change. But he was sick. I mean that in a good way by the way. I’m not saying Jacobs punches like Foreman but Arias felt something he didn’t want to feel so he fought accordingly. I’m not going to criticize the kid because the odds were stacked against him big time. Not in just this fight but in his career.
I say that to say I won’t criticize Jacobs either. Jacobs did what he could. Jacobs can’t be careless and try to force a ko. Arias was holding him and he was also trying to sucker punch him at the same time. Jacobs did a solid job. He wasn’t lights out but he was fast, reactive, powerful and determined. He also won every round vs an undefeated fighter. People will criticize both but Jacobs does not deserve criticism for this fight. Let’s see how he does moving forward. I don’t know if Eddie Hearn is upset with Jacobs not scoring a ko but if he is he’s wrong in my opinion.
If Arias is in the mode he fought Jacobs in I’m not sure if any of the people you named would ko him. It’s hard to ko a strong fighter who is holding you and not opening up. Sometimes the fans don’t get that. The reason why is because the less you punch the more you can brace yourself for the incoming shots. Your body is tense and you aren’t allowing openings. Sometimes fighters who do this get credited for having great chins. But in fact I think the fighters with the best chins are the offensive fighters who open up consistently and still take good shots. The shots you don’t see are the ones that ko you…
Bless up breadman
Mark Sterling here from the UK...always read but rarely write in lol. Just to say that this one of the best mailbags I've ever read check it: 1) you broke down why father trainers can possibly get more out if fighters than regular trainers. 2) the different ways Lomachenko & Righondeaux can win. 3) labelling the different psychologies certain fighters have....you can probably do a book on that subject - That was PEAK. Anyhow all the best, I know your fighters are in good hands......ps loved the mythical matchups from the previous week, like I love my what if comics. Pps would hate to see RJ vs SOG fight love them both no homo – bless
Bread’s Response: Thank you my brother.
Father trainers who know boxing are fine. Fathers who mettle in boxing and abuse their paternal rights are assholes and have no place in boxing. We should never generalize when we analyze.
Rigo vs Loma.. Man listen! Every young fighter in boxing needs to turn their cell phones off, sit up straight and watch and learn. No talking. No tweeting. No texting. School will be in. Can’t wait.
Understanding a mindset is the most important aspect in boxing. Everything starts with the mind.
I've never disagreed with the general consensus for a fight more than the Wilder Joshua fight. I don't think Joshua can get to Wilder, without overly exerting his energy. Joshua will have to work harder to get to Wilder. I think Wilder jabs and moves early, and then starts putting a beating on Joshua around the 6th round. I don't think this goes 8 full rounds. But if u go online, this is a huge mismatch, where Wilder is getting slaughtered. I don't see how.
Bread’s Response: I’m not disagreeing with you, I think Joshua and Wilder need to fight in the ring. Not on paper. There are too many things that can happen in that fight to argue over who will win. But let me ask you this. If Gerald Washington and Artur Spiilka can win rounds and get to Wilder why can’t you imagine Joshua getting to him. I’m just asking because I honestly don’t know. Just challenging your perspective.
First off props on the Jacobs vs Arias call. I thought Jacobs would smoke him but the fight went the distance like you said it would. Props again on saying no one in boxing cares about PED use. What HBO did was shameful. They’re promoting Cletus Seldin like he’s Barney Ross. How many other fighters could have been in that spot? Better fighters. More accomplished fighters. He’s not even a top 15 guy at 140lbs and the division is weak! On top of that he tested positive for a banned substance. If I know about it then they know about it. On to Miller. What are his chances vs the top guys?
Bread’s Response: I don’t know much about Seldin or any failed PED test. So I won’t comment on that. But I do think there are some young stars who could have been in that spot. But before you criticize too much, realize “where” the fights were held. They needed a local ticket seller with a good record. So Seldin fit the bill. You have to remember boxing is a business first.
I like Miller. He’s very clever. But I think he needs to work on his athleticism. I wouldn’t usually say this because most S&C coaches are overrated. But Miller needs to become more athletic. He’s a little slow in his walk down and he will give the better guys too much time to operate. Joshua and Wilder I mean. Heavyweight is not deep and I think he has a reasonable shot to beat everyone else. But the 2 top dogs may be too much for him. Hopefully Miller gets matched good so he can get the development he needs to be the top dog. I really like him and wish him the best.
Is Arum wary of having the public see the size disparity between the fighters outside of fight week? Or why hasn't there been a press conference or two and a face off to promote the fight? Two double Olympic Gold Medalists, and no press conferences yet. Rigondeaux being listed as 5'4 seems fairly generous. Agbeko looked about three inches taller than Rigondeaux at their face offs and Agbeko is no giant. Lomachenko was Walters height at their prefight face off. I'd be surprised if there isn't a three and a half to four inch height difference when Rigondeaux and Lomachenko finally do face off.
What do you think Diaz and Rigondeaux see in Lomachenko's style that they can exploit? You don't have a guy who is one of the smallest, if not the smallest ranked 122 pounder, move up two weight classes to fight a taller, naturally bigger, younger, pound for pound guy, unless you see some things you can tear up come fight night.
People talk about Lomachenko's accuracy, but when Marriaga moved his head, in their fight, he made Lomachenko miss quite a bit. Rigondeaux has much better feet than Marriaga, and is a more natural defensive fighter. Marriaga also showed us that Lomachenko seems to have bad skin. Marriaga didn't land much clean, but Lomachenko had a knot under each eye after half of a fight. Rigondeaux is a very sharp puncher. Sharp in that his fists damage the tissue and bone structure of the opponents faces if he lands clean. The opponent might not even go down, but they end up with facial injuries. I'm wondering how Lomachenko will handle that type of adversity if Rigondeaux starts touching him up.
On the other hand, when younger, Rigondeaux didn't seem to have a problem catching up to a somewhat athletic opponent, like when he fought Rico Ramos. Ramos used his legs a bit, but Rigondeaux had no problem with it. The Dickens fight only lasted two rounds, but Dickens avoided Rigondeaux's attacks a couple times by using his legs to keep the distance when Rigondeaux jumped in. Might not mean much, Rigs was off for a long time, and might not have been loose yet in two rounds either, but he is older now.
What is the purpose of a 9AM rehydration clause, if a boxer still has the whole day to rehydrate after 9AM?
Bread’s Response: I don’t think Bob Arum cares about the size difference. It’s thanksgiving. He’s older and rich. When you’re older and have paid your dues sometimes you just do what you want. You care less about repercussions.
I think Loma is about 3 inches taller and he has more mass. But Rigo actually has longer arms and longer legs. Look at their anatomies close.
Rigo has a sick sort of confidence. He believes in himself more than anything. Some fighters are just wired that way. When you are as talented as he is you can have that sort of self belief. Pedro Diaz is one of the best coaches in boxing. I don’t know what he sees but no fighter is without flaws or tendencies. I see two. One is Loma will showboat at times out of frustration. Which means he’s extra prideful and if he ever gets humiliated he can become disorganized. Two is he fights much better going forward than he does going backwards. He’s a master boxer but not off the back foot.
Loma is very accurate. The problem is getting to Rigo. He discourages his opponent’s because of his hard, fast left hand.
Rigo won’t have to catch up to Loma.
The purpose of the 9am rehydration clause is to even the playing field a little bit. It helps somewhat because fighters don’t eat or drink as heavy the day of the fight.
What's up Bread?
It's been too long since I've sent some questions your way so here goes:
1. What are your thoughts on Ishe Smith? (without going into too much detail of course). And what was the process of putting the fight together? Did you choose Smith from a list of opponents? Who contacted who to make the fight? I have always wanted to have a basic idea of how fights are made
2. What are your thoughts on the following matchups:
Kovalev vs. Shabranskyy (do you think Sergey can be the "Krusher" again?)
Miguel Cotto vs. Sadam Ali (does Ali have a shot at the upset or is he simply too small?)
Billy Joe Saunders vs. David Lemieux (your "rock paper scissors" of boxing suggests that the boxer (Saunders) will outbox the puncher (Lemieux), however I also remember you saying that swarmers tend to trouble pure boxers. With that said can Lemieux apply enough pressure to be that swarmer?)
Errol Spence vs. Lamont Peterson (Like most I favor Spence but my question is can Errol get the stoppage?)
Thanks and best of luck to you and J Rock against Smith,
William in West Palm Beach
Bread’s Response: I like Kovalev over Shabransky. I think the Krusher just punches too hard. This is a good confidence building fight. Lightheavyweight has just become stacked. There are about 6 guys who can beat each other on any given night. I’m curious to see where Kovalev is at mentally though. If he struggles vs Shabranksy that could be the dust on the sawmill.
I like Cotto by UD. Ali is a solid guy but Cotto is a level above. Unless he’s really off he should be able to beat Ali.
I like Lemiuex by a close decision but it will be tough. Saunders can box and Lemiuex can be hit. I expect controversy with this decision.
I favor Spence in the fight also. Inactivity does not hurt some fighters as bad as others but it hurts everyone. Great fighters who sort of need a serious rest. Fighters who have reached a peak so high that no one is really close to them. Floyd Mayweather, Ray Leonard, Muhammad Ali…
Peterson is really good but his inactivity is a concern in my opinion. Peterson has only fought 9 times in the last 6 years anyway. And he usually comes back sharp. But in your mid 30s I wonder if you can keep doing that and keep coming back sharp. I believe Peterson is in this fight and if he can get past his usual shaky start vs punchers I believe he can win some rounds and make a scrap out of it. But I think the physicality of Spence will be too much. Spence has the strength and size of a super welterweight. Peterson was a junior welterweight. Spence is an imposing type of physical fighter where size does matter when he fights.
What do you think of David Haye’s constant injuries? I think he’s a big time PED user that flies under the radar. Who would you have picked to win the rematch?
Bread’s Response: I’m not going to comment on the PED accusations but I would have picked Bellew to stop him again.
Hypothetical match ups. Spence vs Leonard, GGG vs Hagler, Charlo vs Hearns?
Bread’s Response: We don’t know enough about Charlo and Spence yet. It’s not a fair match ups at this point. Hagler on points.
The one thing I can say about you is that you are fair. You’re allegiances are not predictable. Most guys in the media are predictable. I can tell by your comments you really like Andre Ward. But at the same time you like GGG. Despite the Charlo Bros being obnoxious brutes you give them their props. I say this to say I value you your opinion because I know you’re objective.
I started watching boxing full time in 1990. I missed the 80’s Golden Era but I think the 90s was a Golden Era in itself. Can you give objectively give me your 10 greatest fighters since 1990? I have to settle a dispute among hardcore friends.
Bread’s Response: Thank you and yes the 90’s was a Golden Era. No doubt about it.
This is a tough question because some of the best fighters since 1990 started making their legacies in the 80s. Pernell Whitaker, Evander Holyfield and Julio Cesar Chavez all became champions and fought part of their primes in the 80s going into the 90s. So let me try this will be off the top of my head.
1. Roy Jones- Roy Jones is an enigma. He had some flaws even in his prime. He backed straight to the ropes and a good jab disrupted him. I guess some will always wonder about his chin. But I just didn’t see a better fighter at his peak. And having to face a prime James Toney and a 28 yr old Bernard Hopkins for his first two title tries is big time in my opinion.
2. Pernell Whitaker- Whitaker played a little too much and he had a sour attitude. He reminds me of the Isaiah Thomas of boxing. But he was the best pure boxer I have seen with my own two eyes. His performances vs Greg Haugen and Jose Ramirez2 are easily two of histories perfect championship fights.
3. Floyd Mayweather-Mayweather was a master in the ring and at the box office. He’s an all time great by any standards. I rank him 3rd however because I feel as though he benefited more from matchmaking than Whitaker and Jones did.
4. Manny Pacquiao- The Pacman had the best big fight PPV performance run I have ever seen. From David Diaz to Antonio Margarito he fought dominant flawless fight after fight. It was just unreal. His peak was as high as Jones’s. He did have an Achilles heel however. Juan Manuel Marquez. If Pac could have convincingly beat Marquez he would be higher. Just to think the fighter who won 8 titles and actually skipped two divisions is only ranked 4 on my list. Nevertheless he was a special fighter.
5. Julio Cesar Chavez- Chavez’s prime ended early in the 90s. But he was easily one of the best fighters since 1990. Chavez is still the best pressure since the 80s. He’s still the best Mexican fighter ever. He would be higher if this list was from the 80s.
6. Evander Holyfield-Holyfield was a little inconsistent in the 90s. But his victories over Bowe, Tyson, Foreman and Moorer are as good as it gets as far as scalps.
7. Bernard Hopkins- Hopkins was the model of consistency. He was also resilient. If you beat Hopkins he would just beat the man who beat you. Jones beat Hopkins. Tarver beat Jones. Hopkins just went out and beat Tarver. Taylor beat Hopkins. Pavlik beat Taylor. What did Hopkins do? He went out and beat Pavlik. Dawson beat Hopkins. Pascal beat Dawson. What did Hopkins do he went out and beat Pascal. He always kept himself relevant.
8. Felix Trinidad- loved watching this guy. A stand up pressure killer. Tito was a real killer. Not a bully or front runner. His prime victory over Fernando Vargas is must see greatness. He was flawed but only all time greats could take advantage.
9. Oscar De La Hoya- Oscar gets crapped on historically but he fought the toughest competition out of anyone on this list. He fought the #1 pound for pound fighter 5 times. Whitaker, Mosely, Hopkins, Mayweather and Pacquiao. All of them very close to their prime. If you throw in killers like Ike Quartey, Felix Trinidad and Fernando Vargas you have a real fighter. Even Oscar’s stay busy fights were tough with guys like Oba Carr and Jesse James Leija. No one in history could have fought Oscar’s competition and been undefeated. I repeat no one. History should put more respect on his name.
10. James Toney- This last spot was very tough for me. But I give it to Bad Ass James Toney today. His late career resurrection and winning FOY in 2003 sealed it for me. Toney was inconsistent but when he was on he was a real life monster. He was a bully but he was a real bully. A legitimate bully who got better as the fight got harder. His performances vs McCallum, Nunn, Barkley and Jirov let me know I was watching something different. Toney is one of a handful of fighters in history who can match up head to head and come out favorable with all time greats from middleweight to heavyweight. That’s how you know he was special.
Ricardo Lopez, Marco Antonio Barrera, Lennox Lewis, Erik Morales, Joe Calzaghe and Juan Manuel Marquez all have cases to be on this list.
Send Questions to [email protected]