Comments Thread For: Daily Bread Mailbag: Jaron Ennis, Canelo-Charlo, Crawford-Spence, More

[BoxingParadigm]

Yes, he looks special and passes the eye test. But you can’t crown him based just on that.

Who has he really fought up to this point? And then if you bring up the disappointing performance in the Karen fight certain people want you to just ignore and overlook that. Usually the same type of people that want to be supercritical and nitpick everything Canelo does.

You have to hold everyone to the same standards.

How am I crowning him? By saying he's a special talent? That's an observation. I've never even called him a future champ. I just recognize he's super talented and can't stand the pettiness of people that look for reasons to hate.

The performance against Karen wasn't impressive but he still dominated. It happens to many fighters when the opponent shells up.

But that's the thing, being super critical of fighters is not healthy for the sport. Why would it be okay to be super critical of Ennis but not of Canelo, or vice versa?

I'm guessing that because people over criticize your favorite fighter you think it's okay to over criticize other fighters? Is that how this endless toxic cycle goes?

[BoxingParadigm]

boots is 26, ok pretty young, i mean loma for example, the greatest amateur ever, great potential, he got a lot of crap, boxing fans dont like all fighters and their fans etc plus trolling plus hype, generational talk, best ever etc, gets some fans backs up i guess, works all ways too

That's the problem though. It's okay if some people don't like him, but to act like he's not one of the best available contenders and to nitpick his performances to pretend like he's overrated is ridiculous.

I don't agree with the hate Loma received either.

[A.B Counterhooks]

So coach breadman thinks mell will actually pull the upset..huh...interesting.

[The D3vil]

So coach breadman thinks mell will actually pull the upset..huh...interesting.

He didn't say that at all.

He said it's not the mismatch that everyone thinks it is.

[CPNUTKnockoutFreshMart]

This is something that I've been thinking about. People are always saying that Heavyweights " mature differently " and aren't in their primes until their mid to late thirties. What do ya'll think about that ? I kind of think that it's one of those things that people have been hearing forever and they just accept it as true. Or is it really true ? It's counterintuitive that a man would be a better athlete as a middle aged person than as a young man. Could it be that there's not much difference between 25 and 35 ? Or does the improvement in ringcraft more than make up for the age differences ? I can see both sides of it.
What do ya'll think ?

[CPNUTKnockoutFreshMart]

I don't understand the insecurity some people must have that they just can't acknowledge that Boots is a special talent, but instead try to bring up his "poor" defense bs to the conversation.

I know someone like that. No matter how great a fight or a fighter is , he's got to find something to critique. It's not just boxing either , dude is like that about everything. I can't stand that personality trait. Sourpusses aren't worth dealing with.

[ShoulderRoll]

This is something that I've been thinking about. People are always saying that Heavyweights " mature differently " and aren't in their primes until their mid to late thirties. What do ya'll think about that ? I kind of think that it's one of those things that people have been hearing forever and they just accept it as true. Or is it really true ? It's counterintuitive that a man would be a better athlete as a middle aged person than as a young man. Could it be that there's not much difference between 25 and 35 ? Or does the improvement in ringcraft more than make up for the age differences ? I can see both sides of it.
What do ya'll think ?

Generally it seems to be a truism. There are many historical examples…going back to Jersey Joe Walcott.

Just like the smaller weights are the opposite and seem to be completely finished by their early 30s. Nonito Donaire being a notable exception.

[Shadoww702]

I don't know if it's guaranteed Canelo will fight Benavidez. However I think it's naive to not even consider since he has a 3 fight deal. And as it has been said, he always fights the guys people say he never will fight. Every single time. They said he wouldn't fight Trout, Lara, or GGG. On this same forum. I've been around before my profile says. And the goalposts is always moved. Just like it was with Mayweather. I hope he goes on to fight everyone and shut people up for good. He always had that " I'll show you " attitude. But after he shows you, you wanna see something else.

So tru. Heck Jab Jab said Canelo would duck Saunders!!! Amd when he didn't he moved the goalposts. Now Benavidez is the flavor of the month.

[BoxingParadigm]

This is something that I've been thinking about. People are always saying that Heavyweights " mature differently " and aren't in their primes until their mid to late thirties. What do ya'll think about that ? I kind of think that it's one of those things that people have been hearing forever and they just accept it as true. Or is it really true ? It's counterintuitive that a man would be a better athlete as a middle aged person than as a young man. Could it be that there's not much difference between 25 and 35 ? Or does the improvement in ringcraft more than make up for the age differences ? I can see both sides of it.
What do ya'll think ?

I think there's some truth to it. But I don't think the implication is that a 6'3"/230lbs + man is a better athlete in their mid 30s than in their 20s. I think it comes down to the way heavyweight boxers fight. Reflexes, athleticism and quickness don't seem to play as big of a role as size, skills and experience for heavyweights. Sometimes the big heavyweights find that sweet spot of skills size and experience in their 30s and can milk it all the way into their early 40s if they live a clean life.

[1Eriugenus]

'This is something that I've been thinking about. People are always saying that Heavyweights " mature differently " and aren't in their primes until their mid to late thirties. What do ya'll think about that ? I kind of think that it's one of those things that people have been hearing forever and they just accept it as true. Or is it really true ? It's counterintuitive that a man would be a better athlete as a middle aged person than as a young man. Could it be that there's not much difference between 25 and 35 ? Or does the improvement in ringcraft more than make up for the age differences ? I can see both sides of it'.

The way I was told it, as a kid, was that the guys in the lightest divisions might peak at 23 & already be on their way down by 25. As you moved up so did the ages so a welterweight would probably peak around 26 & be on their way down by 29. A H/W wouldn't peak til 29 & that would last until around 32. All those ages were based on the boxers of the past who fought far more frequently than they do today. Obviously, if you fight every month you will wear down sooner than if you fight once a year. Also, boxers from earlier eras mostly smoked & had little or no knowledge of nutrition, so you can add several years onto each of the old estimates.
I think when you look at a fight at flyweight, say, the speed of the contestants is notable. Men actually have peak reflexes, speed & stamina at around 17 & then it is downhill all the way! (Cheerful thought). As you move up in weight speed & reflexes are still important but strength & power become more important & those don't decay so suddenly with age, therefore, the bigger you are, the less the diminution in your speed & reflexes actually matters.