icon Updated at 07:37 AM EST, Sat Dec 15, 2018

Daily Bread Mailbag: Lomachenko-Davis, Wilder-Fury, More

By Stephen "Breadman" Edwards

The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen "Breadman" Edwards tackling topics such as Deontay Wilder vs. Tyson Fury, Freddie Roach being critical of Ben Davison, weight cutting, Lomachenko vs. Tank Davis, Teofimo Lopez and more.

Hi Bread,

1. In the era of same day weigh-ins if a boxer was cutting to much weight, he was losing more than he was gaining because he could not rehydrate much after the weigh-in. It is a little different now. A somewhat righteous argument can be made today that a few boxers are preying on smaller opponents because they rehydrate like crazy by the time they enter the ring. Having said that, weight cutting is bound to take a toll on a boxer’s body even in this era. Pacquiao was a knockout waiting to happen by the end of his reign at flyweight despite the fact that he weighed significantly more than his opponents in the ring. The weight cut itself was a big enough equalizer in his case. Taking all this into consideration, what is your opinion on IBF policy of 10 lbs rehydration limit? Is it necessary in this era or unnecessary? I am seriously conflicted on this one.

2. Why do people pick Duran to beat Whittaker in mythical matchups? Even you gave the slightest edge to Duran in one of your previous mailbags. I know that he no longer had the legs to chase his opponents after the first Leonard fight but can you tell me a fight before the second Leonard fight in which he defeated an elite ‘stick and move’ boxer. In the first fight Leonard fought toe to toe for a large part and when he did box, he did not exactly 'stick and move' like he did in their rematch 5 months later. While Buchanan was a slick outfighter, his style was not exactly 'stick and move'. He would simply pivot if one tried to corner him and keep boxing at an arm's distance and hence Duran did not had to put too much effort to cut the ring. Did Duran ever beat an elite 'stick and move' boxer? If not then why do people think that he can cut off the ring against a guy like Whittaker? I have not seen any Duran fight pre-Leonard besides the Buchanan fight, hence request you to bring me up to speed.

Regards,
Saurabh Kumar

Bread’s Response: 1. Weight cutting in this era is interesting. I think it’s the leading cause of PED use in this era. It’s hard to lose 25lbs and keep your strength and stamina.

I like the IBF 10lb rehydration rule but you have to realize the IBF weighs the fighters in the morning after the weigh in. So the fighters still have about 12 more hours to put on more weight. Just so you know the parameters. It’s not like the fighter can’t weigh more than 10lbs of the weight limit while entering the ring.

2. The reason people pick Duran to beat jut about anyone at 135 is because his peak was just so insanely high. He also defeated a prime fighter at welterweight who was every bit as good as or better than Whitaker in Ray Leonard.

Duran is so good he’s the only fighter I have ordered their prime weight title reign on dvd. I have every Duran title fight from Buchanon to Leonard.

You’re wrong about Buchanon. Ken Buchanon is an elite level HOF stick and mover. Ray Lampkin was also excellent. Villomar Fernandez and Edwin Viruet were also tremendous boxers and real challenges in that style. Duran also defended against undefeated stick and mover Lou Bizarro.

The truth is neither Whitaker or Duran ever faced anything exactly like the other. They were both unique. At lightweight the best fighter Whitaker faced was Azumah Nelson. Nelson was special but he was a lot smaller than Duran and they’re style were different.

What's up Bread, consistent reader, only written in once. Respect your work greatly, i must say. Very curious as to what fight you're referring to as "one of the greatest of this century involving Diego Corrales vs ???"  Wanna see if it's who i think it is???Also, i read a few weeks back of you referring to the similarities between Spence and Hagler, I've been borderline telling my nephew's that for bout a 2yrs now but didn't fully want to say it because I'm a huge Hagler fan. Leonard vs Hagler a draw!!!even though i respect your opinion the other way because of your boxing mind... Keep up the great work!!! And let us know how to spread the work around, we need to get more people to have at least a chance to not see a bias body of work!!! An you can say, i know it's hard for us Brotha's in America, but Wilder loss a close one.. Give us the rematch, he'll Win!!!

AzbywayofFlintown
Bladeface

Bread’s Response: I was speaking of Corrales vs Castillo in the best fight of the century.

Spence has some serious Hagler in his game. Both are hard nosed,heavy handed technicians. Both have those ram rod jabs. And both do nasty body work. Hagler’s prime work from about 78-83 was something. I think Spence also has some Mike McCallum in his game.

I just saw a list of the best jabs ever and Hagler’s was like #4 or so. Hagler’s jab was very underrated. Spence’s is also.

The Wilder vs Fury controversy has taken on a new light. It’s taken on a color tone. I know it took a lot for you to admit Wilder loss....I feel it was a great fight for both. Hopefully they do it again. Thank you.

Hey bread.

Thanks for your response to my question on roy jones a few weeks back. He's my favourite fighter so it was nice to hear from someone with genuine knowledge of how good he was.

My question this week is how good were the klitchko's? Were they fortunate to fight in the era they did as it allowed them to dominate, or were they unfortunate as they didn't have enough quality opposition to prove themselves against?

A couple mythical matchups:

Loma vs marquez at 130lb
Duran vs chavez at 135lb
Pryor vs Whitaker at 140lb.
Ggg vs bhop at 160lbs
Klitchsko vs klitchsko

Thanks, Rob

Bread’s Response: I believe Wladimir Klitschko was more talented and had the GREATER career. I believe Vitali Klitschko was the BETTER fighter.

Wlad is fortunate that he came along when he did. Vitali would have been fine with the killers of the 90s. Wlad was a Gold Medalist in the 96 Olympics. He had an extensive amateur career and plenty of experience. But if you look at his resume closely he missed ALL of the killers of the 90s close to their primes. He fought Ray Mercer when Mercer was ancient. Wlad was brought along very slow for someone of his pedigree. Take a look at other Gold Medalist at heavyweight or lightheavyweight and most were ready for the big time within 4 or 5 years.  He turned pro in 96. He had a chance to step up but he didn’t. I respect Wlad and I think his was wonderful for boxing. But Lennox Lewis didn’t retire until 2003……

If you look at Wlad’s BEST win you don’t see a GREAT one. Maybe Chris Byrd or David Haye. I don’t know…. It’s his sustained excellence over a not so special era that makes him great. Wlad deserves to be a HOF for sure. But I never viewed him Mt. Rushmore level despite his lofty numbers.

Vitali was a bad ass who had injury problems and loyalty to his brother. He never challenged to unify because Wlad had more belts. But his best win is as good as Wlad’s best win. He doesn’t have the numbers but he showed a certain level of toughness and grit and killer menace that Wladimir never showed. Vitali’s performance vs Lennox Lewis showed me something that Wlad never did. Vitali was a killer. Wlad was a great fighter. One was fortunate he didn’t fight in a better era. The other was unfortunate because his historical standing would have been higher.

Loma vs Marquez @130. This is tough because Loma is an aggressive engaging boxer. Marquez can cope with that. He showed it vs Manny Pacquiao. I also believe Marquez’s punch variety would throw Loma off. This is a very close fight. Very close and I can’t call it.

Duran vs Chavez @135. Duran has more physicality than Chavez. He can operate better at higher weights and he’s more dynamic. But Chavez @135 is every bit as good as Duran. He just didn’t stay there long enough. I wouldn’t pick anyone over the Chavez that beat Rosario. I’m serious when I say that. But Duran had more of those type of nights than Chavez did. So for arguments sake Duran by close decision.

Pryor vs Whitaker. This is a wonderful match up and had Pryor not had drug problems this fight would have been realistic. Whitaker turned pro in 1984 and Pryor was still champion during that time. Pryor just fizzled out by the late 80s. Head to head Pryor is really tough to deal with. I have studied both of these guys closely. Whitaker had the greater career because of longevity and rising in weight. But Pryor was just as good. I think Pryor’s volume and stamina would edge it.

GGG vs BHOP. The GGG of 2012-15 was something. Bhop from 96-01 was a little better. I think Bhop would tie him up, move him around the ring and edge a decision.

Vitali vs Wlad. Vitali would beat Wlad. Just watch the Corrie Sanders fights. Vitali had too much chin, too much defense and too much natural fighter’s instincts.

davis-lomachenko_1

No way the #1 fighter in the world should struggle with Jose Pedraza. Loma is overrated I don’t care what anyone says. Tank Davis is not even top 10 P4P and he played with Pedraza. I say make Tank vs Loma now.

Bread’s Response: Well sir you’re an IDIOT. Let me ask why can’t Pedraza win some rounds vs Loma? Pedraza seems comfortable at 135lbs. He’s an Olympian with elite pedigree. He’s a 2 division champion. Pedraza also has a considerable height and length advantage over Loma. Pedraza had forever to train for Loma, he knew he was going to into this unification fight if he won the title and he had a chance to study Linares vs Loma in the previous fight.

You guys get too caught up in the HYPE. These fighters are human beings. Pedraza and his team did a great job. They put together a great gameplan to neutralize Loma a little bit. Loma still won 9 rounds in my opinion he just didn’t get them easy. Loma has been so hot lately you have to have a few cool down performances.

I never say how far a fighter should move up because everyone has a physicality limit. It’s actually a way to DUCK threats by constantly leaving divisions before you clean them out. Loma is fighting at 135 when he can make 130. Whitaker’s limit was 154. Chavez’s was 140. Marquez’s was 147. Mayweather’s was 154. Loma’s seems to be 135. He may be able to sneak a title at 140 but it will take a beneficial circumstance and selective matchmaking.

If Loma stays at 135 and wins all 4 belts and he waits on serious challenges of Teofimo Lopez, Devin Haney, Vergil Ortiz and Tank Davis then it would be harder than anything he’s done as far as jumping weight.

Did you watch Pernell Whitaker when he was the #1 P4P fighter? I bet you didn’t. Because if you did you would know in the center of his PRIME Jorge Paez was able to win 4 or 5 rounds from him. Paez is the same level of guy Pedraza was. Man it’s boxing.

Let me tell you something. The difference between a great fighter and an excellent fighter is only 2 or 3 rounds. A great fighter will consistently win 7 or 8 rounds. An excellent fighter will be able to win the rest from them if well prepared and ON that night. Some nights the great fighter will pitch shuts. Some nights the excellent fighter can win. But on the average this is what it is. So Loma didn’t pitch a shut out or make a guy quit and you say he’s NOT #1. Again you’re an idiot and you know nothing about boxing. Great fighters don’t have to be special on every occasion. Sometimes they’re just good enough to win.

Tank Davis did beat Pedraza easier. I’m high on Davis and that was a tremendous performance. But Pedraza was reportedly struggling to make 130 when he fought Davis. He was also very inactive. This was Pedraza’s 4th fight this year. He was active and sharp and ready.

So while Davis deserves 100% credit for the win. I think Loma faced a different Pedraza. When there were initial talks of Loma vs Tank, the whisper was Tank was too young and not ready. If you remember Floyd Mayweather even sort of threatened Davis by saying he would match him with Loma right away. Floyd knows pedigree and respects Gold Medalist historically. He knows how good Loma is.

Now I have always said that Davis would be competitive with Loma. Just like I said Canelo would be competitive with GGG. But in 2017 Loma was at his apex and Davis was a new young champion. Loma is  6 years older than Tank. I don’t see the fight happening in 2019. But the people behind Tank understand timing. I can see Tank peaking in 2020 when Loma is still the man but sort of where Whitaker was when he fought Oscar. Or maybe where GGG was when the 1st Canelo fight took place. It’s still a tough fight but the older fighter is not at his APEX. The timing will benefit Davis when and if they fight and the fight won’t happen anytime soon.

So you can crap on Loma all you want but he’s lining up the best available fighter, period. There has never been a fighter so good that another top fighter and/or champion can’t win 3 or 4 rounds against them on an ON night. What in the hell is wrong with you? This isn’t video games my man, this is real life boxing.

What do you think is the hardest weight jump in boxing? I have a feeling as to what you will say but I wanted your opinion. I’m also curious as to why none of the welterweights of this era have moved up and won titles at 154?

Bread’s Response: No disrespect to smaller weight class fighters but it’s harder to go from 147 to 154 than it is to go from 122 to 126. It just is. Why do you think Kell Brook is taking his time? Brook doesn’t have to fight eliminators, he choosing too because the water is choppy at 154. The reason none of the welterweights in this era have moved up and won titles at 154 is simple. The junior middleweights are too big and too good. Errol Spence will be the only one in this era to try it and stay at 154.

The higher you go up in weight the harder it is to jump weight classes. It’s a reason why Arthur Abraham is the only middleweight champion to win a title at super middleweight since Nigel Benn. Benn, James Toney, Roy Jones and Chris Eubank all did it but they were all champions in the early 90s. So in over 20 years only Abraham has done it and he struggles mightily at 168. Canelo will be only the 3rd fighter in history to win a title at 154 and a title at 168. The others are Tommy Hearns and Ray Leonard. Special!

The less common something is, usually the harder it is. I think the hardest jump in this era is from 160-168. I think the weight jumping becomes harder starting at 147. The welterweights in this era are about 5’6 to 5’8 with reaches less than 70 inches. The Junior Middleweights are from 5’9 to 6ft with reaches well into the 70s. There is a reason why only the special fighters of the early 2000s and 90s in Pacquiao, Mayweather and Cotto have made the successful jump after 147.

Now for as hard as it is to weight jump in certain divisions it’s still harder to stay in the same division and Unify all of the titles. And fight the best available real contenders fight after fight. Because often times the weight jumping is cherry picking. For example. Canelo is taking a showcase fight vs Rocky Fielding. The weight jump is hard from 160 to 168 but the talent is so different Canelo will light Fielding up like a Christmas tree. It’s more impressive if Canelo beat Charlo, Jacobs and Saunders at 160.

Before I finish what Mikey Garcia is doing is hard! He’s a lightweight and he’s facing the BEST welterweight in the world. He’s also doing it with NO tune ups at 147. Duran and Mosley had tunes ups. But if Garcia pulled this off this is Duran, Mosley, Whitaker, Armstrong level. Mostly special fighters have won real world titles at 135 then again at 147. Throughout history this has been THE special jump. Ross, Armstrong, Duran, De La Hoya, Mayweather, Mosley, Pacquiao, Whitaker…That’s special company and it’s rare even in this era.

Hey Breadman,

I’ve been a boxing fan since ‘86 (Tyson-Berbick was the one that got me). I’ve been reading your column recently and I’m really impressed by your scope of knowledge, and also by the respect you show to boxers. In this day and age, it’s almost a given that people are just going to be trash athletes they don’t like, especially when they’re letting their keyboard do the talking. Thanks for pointing out that that’s something we shouldn’t be letting slide. We’re not out there putting it on the line and most of us would probably fold the first time a good shot made our ears buzz.

In your last column you talked about Diego Corrales and how crazy it is that he’s not even on the HOF ballot. No argument here. Being from Iowa, I may be somewhat biased but I also feel Michael Nunn falls into that category. He had a phenomenal career, and during his reign at middleweight—particularly in his first three title fights—he looked HOF worthy to my eye. He maybe started slipping a bit in the Barkley fight.

No disrespect to Curry, Jackson or McGirt, I’m a fan of all three, but if they’re now in the HOF how is Nunn not even on the ballot? In my opinion, he had a better career than McGirt. It’s hard to compare him to Jackson because Jackson is described as possibly the best pure puncher in boxing history, so it’s crazy it took so long for him to get in. I would rate Nunn’s career as pretty comparable to Curry’s. I think at his peak Curry was rated #2 PFP and Nunn was rated #3 at his. All respect to Curry for his wins over Starling (not easy) and his legendary KO of McCrory, but Nunn had some excellent wins as well and his decline was not as quick or severe as Curry’s.

Anyway, like you said...at least put him on the ballot! I’m sure there are many other fighters as well who earned at least that consideration.

Respectfully,
Clancy Champanois

Bread’s Response: Thank you.

Fans, media and fighters themselves are just too disrespectful on social media.

It’s a travesty that Diego Corrales is not on the ballot. I hope me speaking out about it will bring some attention to Chico Corrales. He deserves it.

You’re correct about Michael Nunn he also deserves to be the Hall or have serious consideration. If an objective historian did a Forensic Examination of Nunn’s career, I truly believe he would say Nunn’s career was as good as or better than McGirt’s, Jackson’s and Curry’s.

Out of the 3 with eyeball test Curry rates the highest. But Nunn was also very highly regarded on his best day. I think the one knock on fighters like Nunn and Demetrius Andrade faces this in this era. Critics assume Nunn was more stylistically difficult than he was good. Nunn was a fast 6’1 southpaw. Often times it’s assumed that fighters who have unique physical attributes if they are right handed with average height they would be middle of the pack guys.

So I get why Curry was slightly more highly regarded on his best day. But Nunn did everything Curry did and a little more. Nunn won a big showdown vs the other great fighter in the division in Sumbu Kalambay. Curry did it vs Milton McCrory. Kalambay was better. Nunn actually had uneven performances during his title reign whereas Curry was lights out until he lost. But Nunn was physically tougher and was harder to beat.

Where Nunn separates himself from Curry is his resistance after his prime. It took a monumental effort from James Toney to beat Nunn. After the Toney loss a fight in which was winning BIG on the scorecards, all of Nunn’s losses were split decisions and one close UD. Curry on the other hand was continuously stopped. There careers are similar and I won’t argue either way but I wanted to point that out.

Julian Jackson has two huge wins over Herol Graham and Terry Norris. He won the junior middleweight title once and the middleweight title 3 times. Jackson was a special puncher. His longevity was similar to Nunn’s but I think Nunn was better or his best day. Jackson’s best win is better than Nunn’s best but it’s close. It’s close but eyeball test tells me Nunn was the better fighter.

Buddy McGirt never had an overly distinguished title reign but he was a real fighter who fought quality guys in title and non title fights. McGirt gave a prime Pernell Whitaker all he wanted and then some. Whitaker went to McGirt’s home town for the title and McGirt went to Whitaker’s home town in order to get it back. There was a difference in the two performances by McGirt. I think his last prime performance was the 1st Whitaker fight.

McGirt also has a perfect fight on his ledger. His 1991 win over Simon Brown was “Death by a 1000 Foot Feints.” It was one of the rare perfect performances. People assume McGirt is winless vs Gold Medalist but that’s not true. McGirt loss to Meldrick Taylor and Pernell Whitaker but he has a big 1st rd ko vs Howard Davis Jr.

Eyeball test on their best day I say McGirt was a little better than Nunn but Nunn was more difficult. Nunn has slightly more accomplishments but McGirt fought more great fighters in their primes.

All in all Nunn is on the level of the 3 modern fighters who were just voted in.

I saw a fighter live last night on the Loma undercard that overly impressed me his name is Alexander Besputin - a Russian welterweight - have you ever seen him ? If so your thoughts ? He fights like Loma but more offensive and in my opinion he beats Crawford and Spence right now - Howie from NJ

Bread’s Response: I looked at him on youtube when I read your comments. Besputin does seem like the goods but I have to say it’s too early to tell. The easiest thing to do is overrate a superior talent who is fighting at the intermediate level. He will look special. It’s because his talent is overwhelming. But we have to see him do it at the top level before we give him credit for it.

I see a talented, well schooled, powerful fighter with real athleticism. But before I say he could beat Crawford or Spence I would like for him to beat some top 10 fighters at 147 so we can properly assess him.

I will admit he does look good but I personally can’t say how good.

bread, hope all is well mate. a couple questions

• its the end of 2018, the decade is almost over. who is fighter of the decade at this point and do you see this changing in next 2 years? can mayweather claim it fighting only 5 or so years? is ward's resume strong enough? Canelo? GGG? if usyk successfully moves to HW you think he could claim it? if lomachenko beats garcia is he a look in? if crawford beats spence?
• on lomachenko, how does he rate historically for southpaws? i know you say that his career is still building, however, he's 30yrs old and had 12 (i think) title fights.
• also, i wrote in 6 months ago saying what a good year for boxing 2018 was turning out. id say it didn't disappoint. there has been some crackers this year culminating with a HW matchup that will go down in boxing folklore. there are a lot of divisions that look healthy with stars and potential stars scattered throughout the boxing landscape. in saying this there needs to be some changes brought in for the judging. I also wish the boxing public would stop being so negative all the time. this is boxing, the greatest, most pure sport in the world. bring on 2019!
thanks bread, appreciate your blog. GK from OZ.

Bread’s Response: the decade is actually over Jan 1, 2020. That marks the end of the which started Jan 1. 2010. So to correct you we have one more year.

From a historical perspective let’s look at the Fighter of the Decades. In the 2000s it was Manny Pacquiao. I think he won it with his huge 2009 the last year of that decade. In the 90s it was Roy Jones. The 80s it was Ray Leonard. I think he won it with is victory over Marvin Hagler in 1987. In the 70s it was Roberto Duran despite Ali having the best win of the decade. In the 60s it was Ali. Ray Robinson was the Fighter of the Decade in the 40s and 50s. Henry Armstrong was the fighter of the 30s. Harry Greb was the fighter of the 20s. some would argue Benny Leonard…..Jimmy Wilde was the Fighter of Decade 1910-19. Some would argue Sam Langford but Langford lost too many fights to Harry Wills during that time. From 1900-09 it was Joe Gans.

I illustrate this to show how special you have to be in order to be FOD. Only one fighter did it in two decades. And that is the best fighter of them all Sugar Ray Robinson . If you are the fighter of the decade it’s different from Fighter of the Year you can have a hot year and not be special, it’s impossible to have a hot decade and not be special. You’re on Mt Rushmore if you win Fighter of the Decade. You’re a 1st ballot HOF if you win FOD.

At this very moment I think it’s between Floyd Mayweather, Andre Ward and Canelo Alvarez.

The Fighter of the Decade not only has to be the decade’s best and most accomplished fighter but he has to have the “IT” factor in the big events. Everytime Canelo wins a BIG fight, Mayweather’s win over him in 2013 gets better and better. Canelo may have been young when they fought but Mayweather was smaller and he was 36.

Canelo has the star power and go getter attitude to pull off two huge wins in 2019. If he does that I assume the voters will say he was green in 2013 and that Mayweather could not beat this version of Canelo. I’m not saying that is accurate but I think that’s what the line of thinking will be.

Andre Ward is my personal choice as of right now but it is close. Ward has the Froch win which won him the Super 6, Kovalev and Dawson who was very highly regarded at the time Ward beat him.

Mayweather has some quality work in this decade. Mosley, Cotto, Canelo and Maidana. Floyd has a legit chance because that’s 3 first ballot HOF wins in the decade. Ward doesn’t have 3 scalps that highly regarded.

Canelo has Cotto, Mosley and GGG. But Mosley was done and GGG was controversial.

I think going down the stretch it will be tough.

I think Crawford and Loma are terrific but I don’t think either will win it. Crawford won’t get Spence in 2019. Loma may get Mikey Garcia but he’s not guaranteed to win that. Right now Loma has better wins than Crawford but I’m not sure if either can claim Fighter of the Decade status.

If Usyk were to beat Joshua, Wilder or Fury in 2019 he has a real claim.

If Mikey Garcia were to beat Errol Spence and Loma in 2019 he would have a last second chance.

Loma is top 10 southpaws ever. He’s rising but he still has work to do.

What’s good Bread. I hate how people can ruin the vibe of a fight by screaming robbery all the time. The Wilder vs Fury fight was a far cry from a robbery. Most people on Fury side look at the one judges score card and get hung up on it because of how “wide” it was but if that same judge scores the fight 114-112 for Wilder the results are the same, right? I guess what I am saying is it still took two judges to make this fight a draw. I know there are a lot of things that we can correct with the scoring system and the judges, but I hate the bad stink it puts on this fight about nothing. The people on Wilder side complain about Reiss, who I love, and the “slow count”. I loved the way that Reiss officiated the fight and I don’t think that it was a slow count. I thought Tyson made it back to his feet before the 10 count, but I do have one thing to question about referring in general. The first knock down Fury returned to his feet, JR had him step to him, ask him was he okay to continue and to raise his gloves, and then said fight. On the second knock down, JR ask him to walk to him, was he able to continue, walk over there and back and then fight. Now, I know if JR is asked he would probably say that the walk was for further evaluation, but it could be perceived as additional recovery time and if I am the fighter in the opposite corner I am saying “you saw all you needed to see when he was standing face to face with you and his arms draped across your shoulders”. I feel like a referee’s evaluation should be the same every time. The additional recovery time received could hamper the outcome (I’m not saying it did). I felt the same way when the doctors came in after the break to evaluate DW during the Ortiz fight. This man was sitting on a stool for a full minute and you mean to tell me you couldn’t have shined your light in his eyes during that break?

I hate to bring race up, but can I just say that as a black man I am so disappointed in a couple of my favorite fighters and I can totally agree with and interview Wilder gave when he said that some great fighters have continued to publicly bash him but not one of them have reached out to give any kind of advice. This is not only a problem in boxing but our community as a whole. I know other nationalities may have it but I have worked in the financial sector for a great deal of my career and I have seen Hispanics, Jews, and Whites pass on beneficial information to help the next get on but in our community we get on and try to separate ourselves instead of lending a helping hand.  Andre Ward is probably one of the biggest that I am disappointed in because to me he questioned DW heart by saying “He wasn’t sure if Wilder would take a rematch and go through that again”. First, Ward has been in this spot, so you would think he would choose his words more carefully. Secondly, Wilder has never given anyone a reason to question his heart, and thirdly the way Ward talks you would think Wilder just took a beating for 12 rounds, he was the one who knocked Fury out cold. I guess I should have preference this by saying I only heard about this I didn’t read it so I don’t know the full context.

I don’t feel like blacks are entitled to say someone won that didn’t so please don’t take it that way because I called the fight a draw live, but after going back and watching it I to believe that Fury won by a round or so. He was sneaking in some really good shots that made Wilder respect him, but I just feel like some of these guys with platforms should critic without bashing.

The last thing I’ll say because I know I have run long is that people can talk all they want about DW not being able to box but my good friend Bro Nazeem put it best when he said that every guy that stepped in the ring with him could box better than him and what happened?? He even boxed the “perceived” best boxer in the HW division (Ortiz) and what happened? These are big men and while boxing is great to see at some point somebody is getting hit in the head and if my hit is harder than yours night night.

Bread’s Response: I usually don’t answer long comments but this was awesome. Just try to shorten it up a little bit next time, it barely makes the cut off with the Editors.

The fans and media have ruined what in essence was a great fight. So many conspiracy theories have come up….

The point you make about Jack Reiss is just astute. I thought the same exact thing. There was NO long count. That is just ignorance. But AFTER Fury got up I thought to myself there is a fine line between getting a fighter to respond correctly and giving him too much time. The fighter who scored the knockdown should not be punished for scoring a knockdown. As great as Reiss was and he was great, I do feel it was a difference in the procedures from knockdown 1 to knockdown 2.

The one thing I hate is improper arguments and points. Let me explain…..I often talk to my mom and a popular fighter about the race related police shooting etc. They usually call me for an objective opinion on each case.

Recently we watched the Sandra Bland case. I always thought that the argument was WRONG. There is no proof that someone went into Bland’s cell and murdered her. But it is proof that the officer targeted her and BAITED her. She should have NEVER been in jail in the 1st place.

The officer made a u turn on video, followed Bland. Sped up behind her which is a gesture that the officer wants to get around you. Then when Bland correctly pulled over, the officer used it as an excuse to stop her because technically she didn’t signal. But we ALL know that was just a technical excuse. Bland was trying to get out of his way, it was obvious.

After he wrote up the warning the contact should have been over. But instead he baited Bland by asking her was she ok in a sarcastic tone. As if she’s not allowed to be irritated. Then everything went haywire and she was dead a few days later. The people who are supporting Bland keep making this out to be an obvious murder. But they don’t focus enough on the BAIT tactic to arrest her in the 1st place.

In the Wilder case, his supporters keep bringing up a long count. There was NO long count. Fury was UP within 10 seconds and he was up before the 10 count which doesn’t have to be exactly 10 seconds. Fury beat both.

But as you astutely point out, the TIME Reiss gave him AFTER he got up can be questioned. Reiss did a tremendous job but if I’m Team Wilder I would ask why the different approach between knockdowns?

But again you’re on your game. Because you noticed that Wilder was given extra time in his fight with Ortiz. So as the saying goes. Time evens out everything. Wilder was the benefactor of extra time once and once he was the short changed party.

I have heard your argument before about black fighters saying certain things about other black fighters.  I am trying to develop a better opinion on it. I don’t believe a fighter has to say something he believes that is NOT true out of racial allegiance. But I also don’t believe a fighter should be disrespected or made fun of because he lost. I also believe you don’t have to say everything you say and know. There are lots of things I feel and know about fighters that I just keep to myself.

However, The TRUTH should have NO color. Floyd Mayweather and Andre Ward are the icons of our era for black fighters. And they both think Wilder loss. I know that has to hurt Wilder. And I just don’t know what to say about it. It’s tough and I feel bad for Wilder because I can tell he’s hurt. But both Mayweather and Ward have a right to their opinions. Man I really feel bad that this whole event went left like this. This really went too far.

I never rescore fights. If you do you will find rounds to give to the “other” guy. Initial opinion I thought Fury edged it with eye ball test no pen and pad but I wasn’t sure. The last knockdown made it nippy. I also left saying what a great fight!

Naazim knows boxing. He knows that talent and gifts can’t be broken down how the numbers guy try to. Analytics does not work in head to head combat fights. Wilder will never be great technically. He’s 33 years old and 8 title defenses in. But his sum total is greater than his parts broken down.

He’s a ferocious puncher. He’s a killer. He’s fast and athletic. He has tremendous will power. He has a clutch gene. And he does not try to be perfect. He has an impromptu way of imposing himself. Wilder is a real problem for any heavyweight in the world despite not being the most technically sound fighter. I have a saying. Just because you are better than someone, it doesn’t mean you can beat them. 

Bread,

Regardless of whether GGG was already past his prime, what do you think the chances are Canelo took what's left?  What's your gut reaction as to what effect on Canelo those fights will have?  What will you be looking for during his fight Saturday?

--Rob

Bread’s Response: I have a feeling that Canelo sapped some of Golovkin’s prime but I’m not totally sure. Before I totally assess I would like to see how Golovkin looks against other opponents. GGG looked like GGG vs Vanes Martyrosyan which was his in between fight….

Bread,

I remember asking you about Teofimo Lopez about six months ago and you said you hadn't seen much of him to give an honest assessment of him. Well, I'm guessing that probably still applies since he's had two quick stoppages since then. But he has some special qualities to him. Word on the street is he handled Haney pretty well in sparring and was just too strong for him. His strength and power is clearly on display every time he steps in the ring and I believe TR will fast track him with giving him legit top 10 LWs in 2019 before getting him a title shot either late in 2019 or early 2020. And that then leads TR setting up the Lomachenko fight. While I think the world of Lomachenko, it is clear at 135 he has reached his maximum weight class and isn't quite the same fighter. I honestly think in a years time Teofimo will beat Lomachenko, and he will beat him in style. TR would have their next big star, but this one with some PPV potential until Lomachenko. Thoughts? Just remember I told you this!

Take care,

Jay

Bread’s Response: I did see Lopez’s ko of Mason Menard. That was brutal. But 1st round kos can be misleading. He looks to be an amazing talent but you want to see a kid go through rounds with multiple opponents before you get crazy. It’s easy to overrate offensive talents. I still would like to see more but he does look impressive.

I see lots of physicality and athleticism. I also see a kid who will one day be a welterweight where as Loma seems topped out at 135lbs. So there is a physicality difference. It was the difference between Pernell Whitaker and Felix Trinidad.

I won’t argue that Lopez will be able to beat Loma in a year. Loma has some sharks in the water coming for him. It really reminds me of Quartey, Oscar and Tito coming around when Whitaker was hitting 30 and topping out at welterweight.

Loma has Lopez, Haney, Davis and Ortiz all in the waters hovering. The one thing I respect about Loma is, he’s asking for the heavy work. He just called out Tank Davis in an interview. Loma is also trying to unify the entire division. I bring that up because if he gets all 4 belts then if any of those kids want to win a title they have to go through him. I love that.

I am very curious to see if Top Rank will allow Loma to win the other 2 titles before Lopez can win one. That will tell me something.

Back to Lopez. In this era everyone takes the wait and see approach. Loma is NOT from this era. He’s built differently. I knew it when he didn’t take a tune up BETWEEN Salido and Russell. Loma is the GUN of all GUNS in this era. If I’m Loma I ask for Lopez NOW. Lopez has already called him out so he CAN’T turn down the fight. So instead of waiting a year or two when the fight may favor Lopez more. How about GO get him right now and see if you can shut him up. The more Loma waits the more time he gives Lopez to get better.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions last week, Bread. Really made my week. Will keep this week short. What would it take at this stage for Anatoly Lomachenko to make a hall of fame career? He really laid the foundations with the 2012 Ukrainian Olympic team and the success they are now having as professionals is quite impressive. Will Atlas taking over for the Nail diminish the work he started? It’s a shame Anatoly doesn’t like to do interviews.

Best regards,

Eric from Florida

Bread’s Response: Anatoly Lomachenko is already a HOF coach. Has anyone ever been given so much credit for an Olympic Team’s success? Has anyone ever had a fighter that one 3 different title in their first 12 fights? Trust me he’s already in the HOF.

The only question I have about Anatoly is why don’t the other Ukrainian Olympians train with him as pros. It’s a little odd they attribute most of their success to him as amateurs but they don’t train with him as pros. Maybe he doesn’t have time because of his son. Who knows but that is the only question I have about him. Other than that I know a great coach when I see one. And it’s not always about the fighter. Loma is a special talent. Once in a generation level talent. But you can see coaching in his approach. Sometimes you see a kid with talent and you know he’s the reason. But with Loma I see him and his father. It’s the same thing I saw in Andre Ward and Virgil Hunter. The talent is cultivated by special chemistry and coaching.

What did you think of Freddie Roach’s criticism of Tyson Fury’s head coach? If you didn’t read it, Roach claimed he was disappointed that Fury was told to go for the ko. And that the gameplan was too defensive.

Bread’s Response: Ben Davison is Fury’s head coach that you’re referring too. I thought he did a great job and coached a good fight. I thought his instructions were clear and productive. But the camera doesn’t pick up the total 60 seconds in between rounds. So I just don’t know.

I assume Roach has a reason for his opinion. I was a little shocked that the criticism was made public so early after a performance where more people felt Fury won than they thought he lost. But oh well it’s boxing.

Send Questions to [email protected]

Tags: boxing image