Comments Thread For: Daily Bread Mailbag - Extra Edition: Canelo-GGG 3, Tyson-Ali, More

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with a Extra Edition for Sunday, as Stephen "Breadman" Edwards tackles topics such as Canelo Alvarez vs. Gennadiy Golovkin trilogy, Mike Tyson vs. Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson vs. Evander Holyfield, and more.
[Click Here To Read More]

[HTown Killer]

Man me as a fan of the sport an now a fan of breadman edwards I love that he's tuning out two of these mailbags a week. I would have to disagree with him on this point with GGG an his slippage starting in the Brook fight. Everybody keeps saying it but also forgetting like GGG an his competition went way up right starting with Brook **** thats what the fans of the sport wanted right they wanted to see how he fared with better comp an it all started with brook. Yea we all kno Brook is a welterweight/Jr middleweight but aye he's world class so that was GGG's best opponent so far of his career brook I would say had almost every advantage you could think of over GGG except of course the power an maybe the jab because brook has a nice jab he jus doesn't need to rely on it as much as GGG I kno history shows GGG has a better jab but brooks jab is maybe as good if not better since brook is the faster fighter. With that fight 4 yrs ago brook gave a good count of himself even tho he got broken down at the end, brook showed me he was a world class fighter but his body jus couldn't hold up that power. GGG on the other hand he wasn't using his jab like he usually did since brook was showing him angles not being stationary an brook being the faster fighter so GGG didn't wanna be countered but all that changed once GGG tasted brooks power **** most of the fight he walked through those punches he took from brook to dish out his power. GGG let the big crowd of british fans his ego an jus being ignorant so he didn't look as dominant in the fight. People forget to factor in alot of things in that fight plus the Jacobs an canelo fights, plus don't get me started with his past few fights with a new trainer people are being impatient with that like **** its 2 fights in plus he's older on top of not ever being a defensive fighter so he's gonna need time to learn an use those techniques from banks correctly ina fight

[HTown Killer]

With GGG's fights with Jacobs an canelo him being in his late 30's GGG used the one thing he used almost his entire career an got him where he is today an that was his jab the fundamental punch in boxing. The one punch that sets up everything for him since he doesn't have the fastest hands an fighting these younger guys so what did people expect to see him do if he saw in those fights like dam these guys are faster an more skilled then I thought so I'll do whatever it takes to win. He's a smart guy since he could've jus walked those guys down left himself vulnerable like he did with brook but he knew goin into those fights he had to fight smart an win no matter what, an it didn't matter to him how he looked to the fans as long as he won an showed the fans an the skeptics he belonged at the top even this late in his career. I kno the skeptics including myself as a fan of his we were expecting to see him KO Canelo an Jacobs since thats what he was doing to these other guys

[Jab jab boom]

Man me as a fan of the sport an now a fan of breadman edwards I love that he's tuning out two of these mailbags a week. I would have to disagree with him on this point with GGG an his slippage starting in the Brook fight. Everybody keeps saying it but also forgetting like GGG an his competition went way up right starting with Brook **** thats what the fans of the sport wanted right they wanted to see how he fared with better comp an it all started with brook. Yea we all kno Brook is a welterweight/Jr middleweight but aye he's world class so that was GGG's best opponent so far of his career brook I would say had almost every advantage you could think of over GGG except of course the power an maybe the jab because brook has a nice jab he jus doesn't need to rely on it as much as GGG I kno history shows GGG has a better jab but brooks jab is maybe as good if not better since brook is the faster fighter. With that fight 4 yrs ago brook gave a good count of himself even tho he got broken down at the end, brook showed me he was a world class fighter but his body jus couldn't hold up that power. GGG on the other hand he wasn't using his jab like he usually did since brook was showing him angles not being stationary an brook being the faster fighter so GGG didn't wanna be countered but all that changed once GGG tasted brooks power **** most of the fight he walked through those punches he took from brook to dish out his power. GGG let the big crowd of british fans his ego an jus being ignorant so he didn't look as dominant in the fight. People forget to factor in alot of things in that fight plus the Jacobs an canelo fights, plus don't get me started with his past few fights with a new trainer people are being impatient with that like **** its 2 fights in plus he's older on top of not ever being a defensive fighter so he's gonna need time to learn an use those techniques from banks correctly ina fight

I don't know if his competition went "way up" with Brook. Especially at mw. Brook was a world class welterweight but very small to be a mw. He'd actually be undersized as a jmw. At mw, I'm not sure brook would defeat some of GGG's former opponents like Lemuiex, Curtis Stevens, Willie Monroe. I'm actually not even sure brook would beat Gabe Rosado at mw. But to your point, it's tough to tell because as bread alluded to, most clean athletes decline around 34/35 yrs old and unfortunately for ggg, that's around the same time some guys were finally willing to fight him. I will give brook eternal credit for being willing to do what the lineal mw champion wasn't willing to do at that time, which was face GGG at 160... Just too bad that he was a true welterweight.

[wrecksracer]

GGG needs a knockout to win. It didn't happen in the first two fights, and it won't happen in the 3rd.

[Fire4231]

Another great mail bag Breadman. However the more I read these letters, the more I realize some guys have to overhype their favorite with Not so subtle bias. Problem is for me this stuff does not stand up to the litmus test.

Specifically the last writer is a prime example. I am a fan of all three fighters (Loma, Ward and Mayweather. I am just predisposed to like special fighters.).

However, somehow the writer positions Loma as an adaptable genius constantly making creative adjustments and adding frustrations to his opponents simultaneously with the opposing brain hemisphere... Okay no hype at all here.

I am sorry I don’t see him that way at all. I see Loma as having technical evolutionary footwork that is designed to use speed to take advantage of predictable boxer movement and understood blind spots.

He remarkably knows with mathematical precision the angles and can predict when it is safe to throw from a blind spot. That my friends is amazing in itself!!! However what I have not seen is him adapt on the fly and use a completely new style from bell to bell.

Matter fact when the footwork algorithm he has perfected couldn’t be relied on because the fighter (Upset artist and ESPN’s Missing L Salido) didn’t give him time to set it up. He did come on in the end but it was because Salido got tired and Loma’s footwork became effective again. In that fight Loma lost and never even had a desire to avenge it.

Prime Pacquiao would have been a night mare for Loma. To be honest, I don’t think Loma wants to see him today.

However he describes Floyd Mayweather who waited to learn from the brilliance of other fighters. Silently taking notes and dominating fighters with what he astutely snared from others efforts? Yet Mayweather beat fighters in ways that they have never been dominated. He also beat many of them after their most brilliant wins. I saw him losing matches and figure them out before mid-fight to beat them with a completely different style. Who gave him the blue print to do what he did to JMM, Pacquiao, Corrales, Canelo, Judah, Dela Hoya, Hernandez, Manfredy, Mosely, Hatton... etc. in everyone of those fights I saw Floyd beating those great fighters in a manner I had not yet seen them dominated not to mention making quick effective adjustments when things weren’t going his way.

I give credit to Loma for the most evolved and precise technical footwork advancement I have seen since Ali. However this question writer takes a great thing and over sells it as usual.

What he described is Closest to what I saw Mayweather do from fight to fight. And if he learned by watching others, who were the others he watched to put it together? This makes no sense.

Sorry to interrupt a well written mail bag with counter logic to what seems to be based on bias. Whether conscious and strategic or unconscious and incompetent it always shows up. I am realizing as life goes on, the former and the latter always look exactly the same.

[ShoulderRoll]

Golovkin started looking less dominant once he started fighting better opposition. It's not rocket science.

Getting wins against the Grzegorz Proksas of the world isn't hard to do. Just ask Sergio Mora.

[Thuglife Nelo]

Damn Breadman with his alts in the thread... it’s like his fictitious Q&A.

[Robi13]

Wow, Greg Maddux is my favorite pitcher of all time and baseball is my favorite sport... it’s a shame he never got a ring with how deep the braves in the 90’s were... I can compare the great Juan Manuel Márquez to Maddux... just surgical. Great bag and I haven’t said that in a long time. Respect ✊

[Switch-Hitter]

Another great mail bag Breadman. However the more I read these letters, the more I realize some guys have to overhype their favorite with Not so subtle bias. Problem is for me this stuff does not stand up to the litmus test.

Specifically the last writer is a prime example. I am a fan of all three fighters (Loma, Ward and Mayweather. I am just predisposed to like special fighters.).

However, somehow the writer positions Loma as an adaptable genius constantly making creative adjustments and adding frustrations to his opponents simultaneously with the opposing brain hemisphere... Okay no hype at all here.

I am sorry I don’t see him that way at all. I see Loma as having technical evolutionary footwork that is designed to use speed to take advantage of predictable boxer movement and understood blind spots.

He remarkably knows with mathematical precision the angles and can predict when it is safe to throw from a blind spot. That my friends is amazing in itself!!! However what I have not seen is him adapt on the fly and use a completely new style from bell to bell.

Matter fact when the footwork algorithm he has perfected couldn’t be relied on because the fighter (Upset artist and ESPN’s Missing L Salido) didn’t give him time to set it up. He did come on in the end but it was because Salido got tired and Loma’s footwork became effective again. In that fight Loma lost and never even had a desire to avenge it.

Prime Pacquiao would have been a night mare for Loma. To be honest, I don’t think Loma wants to see him today.

However he describes Floyd Mayweather who waited to learn from the brilliance of other fighters. Silently taking notes and dominating fighters with what he astutely snared from others efforts? Yet Mayweather beat fighters in ways that they have never been dominated. He also beat many of them after their most brilliant wins. I saw him losing matches and figure them out before mid-fight to beat them with a completely different style. Who gave him the blue print to do what he did to JMM, Pacquiao, Corrales, Canelo, Judah, Dela Hoya, Hernandez, Manfredy, Mosely, Hatton... etc. in everyone of those fights I saw Floyd beating those great fighters in a manner I had not yet seen them dominated not to mention making quick effective adjustments when things weren’t going his way.

I give credit to Loma for the most evolved and precise technical footwork advancement I have seen since Ali. However this question writer takes a great thing and over sells it as usual.

What he described is Closest to what I saw Mayweather do from fight to fight. And if he learned by watching others, who were the others he watched to put it together? This makes no sense.

Sorry to interrupt a well written mail bag with counter logic to what seems to be based on bias. Whether conscious and strategic or unconscious and incompetent it always shows up. I am realizing as life goes on, the former and the latter always look exactly the same.

I think what he was getting at, if I’m reading it correctly, is that Floyd could take his opponents’ first push and could think on his feet to mount a counterattack. He did it with Mosley, Hatton, and Maidana. Took the attack, kept his cool, and adjusted to stifle their efforts and get the win.

Or I could be wrong. Maybe there is a bias. Or he just made a poor analogy between boxing and solving a Rubik’s cube.