Comments Thread For: Daily Bread Mailbag: The Heavyweight Landscape Post Joshua-Ngannou

[1Eriugenus]

I don't think it is about modern fighter's moral quality. It just seems ******ly hard to get the best fights made these days. There is all this rubbish which I don't even want to understand about 'which side of the street you're on'. When I was a lad all top American boxers were promoted by either Don King or Bob Arum but no matter how they hated each other King & Arum did co-operate to make huge fights. Most of the big fights, like Chavez-Camacho, Chavez-Taylor, Chavez-Whittaker, Curry-McCrory, Tyson-Holyfield, Jones-Toney, did get made although some (eg Chavez-Camacho & Tyson-Holyfield) got made too late. Nowadays I'm astonished when a fight like Crawford-Spence actually goes ahead! I daresay my grandchildren may see Tank v Haney when they are both about 40.

[1Eriugenus]

Boxing is a brutally demanding sport & you can get badly hurt or killed. I totally understand a young boxer thinking that if they are going to sign up for a big fight they want to get paid. I don't understand the idea put around by some idiots on this site that you become a legend by defending your IBO title 20 times or by moving up & down to win IBO titles in 7 different divisions. I agree with Mark Elding on Sugar Shane & I would also recommend Carl Froch &, above all, Commander Evander. You become a legend by fighting the best men you can fight & never swerving anyone.

[crimsonfalcon07]

There’s a few. Lomachenko’s been fighting naturally bigger guys for 6 years now, and past his peak. Usyk almost as long, and now faces the gargantuan Fury. Teofimo hasn’t shied away from stylistically tricky matchups. But there really isn’t many guys who proved they would fight anyone since the days of Shane Mosley and James Toney. Mosley went 6 fights in a row in his prime without a single convincing win. Said way more about the quality of his competition than anything else. Shane just didn’t give a **** about who he was matched with.

Don't forget Naoya Inoue. He literally signed a contract to never take an easy fight, and has fought the best available competition his whole career. Never ducked anyone, got ducked by the 4 kings at 115, uses his cash cow status to make the big fights instead of cherry pick. He's fought world champions, most ranked in the top 4 at the time of fight, in a full half of his career, and has a higher percentage of title fights than any other active fighter. I'd be curious to see how the ATG's stack up in terms of fighting ranked opponents. Not to mention he's fought the best in his divisional debut 3 times, and if he cleans out 122, he'll have fully cleaned out two consecutive divisions.

[1Eriugenus]

True dat

[Mark Elding]

Don't forget Naoya Inoue. He literally signed a contract to never take an easy fight, and has fought the best available competition his whole career. Never ducked anyone, got ducked by the 4 kings at 115, uses his cash cow status to make the big fights instead of cherry pick. He's fought world champions, most ranked in the top 4 at the time of fight, in a full half of his career, and has a higher percentage of title fights than any other active fighter. I'd be curious to see how the ATG's stack up in terms of fighting ranked opponents. Not to mention he's fought the best in his divisional debut 3 times, and if he cleans out 122, he'll have fully cleaned out two consecutive divisions.

I was going to mention Inoue but omitted him for brevity. Been a fan since he starched Narvaez in only his 8th pro fight. You’re right about that signing on commitment.

Comparing the ATG’s in terms of ranked opponents can generate misleading results, when the modern era simply has more divisions and more titles per division. Such a comparison can skew the results in favour of the modern guys even when they’ve had far fewer fights.

[Topdogggbm]

The write in about Floyd’s significance and GGGs historical standing stood out the most for me. Solid points on Floyd’s standing at 47

-but I would add that Crawford accomplished more if not equal at 47 as Floyd IMO.
-GGG assessment is dead on.
- AJs “resurgence “ is sham. A clever product of timing and matchmaking. The fighters since the usyk rematch are solid but don’t put him at 2,3

Crawford more at 147 than Floyd?????? Did you look at the opponents listed for Floyd?! There’s like 4 or 5 Hall of famers! And maybe only ONE name that would be considered an “average fighter” in Carlos Baldomir. But even he was a champ when they fought. Crawfords resume is trash compared to that. And although his career isn’t over, I think most would agree the only hall of famer Crawford has fought at 147 is Spence. Crawford mid level opponents at 147 (like Horn, Mean Machine, etc) would rate under each and every single name that Floyd fought.

I can understand if one thinks Crawfords talent is comparable or better than Floyd. I DON’T AGREE WITH THAT. But I can understand if some people want to think that, based on an eye test. But comparing resumes?! It’s not even a close debate.

[factsarenice]

It's typical American, they truly believe that they are the best in everything. Even a gatekeeper like Wilder is seen by them as an elite fighter. Then the question is, why did he refused a whooping $100M offer to fight AJ, an amount he couldn't even see in his wildest dream? Because he knew AJ would have destroyed him.

In context.... Wilder was confident and unbeaten but Shelly Finkel thought AJ was a risk and he convince Wilder that he had a better plan. From a business standpoint, Al Haymon and Shelly weren't going to risk a money maker and the only heavyweight belt they had. Part of Shelly's master plan was to resurrect Tyson Fury, beat him, claim his "lineal champ" status and leapfrog AJ. Unfortunately for Wilder, Fury turned out to be far better than expected.