.jpg)
The Daily Bread Mailbag returns with Stephen “Breadman” Edwards tackling topics such as the International Boxing Hall of Fame, Mark Magsayo beating Gary Russell Jr, the return of Keith Thurman with his win over Mario Barrios, thoughts on Artur Beterbiev, Roy Jones Jr, Manny Pacquiao vs. Vasiliy Lomachenko, and more. (photo by Ryan Hafey)
Ssup Bread,
Who are the worst snubs by IBHOF? By snub, I do not mean guys like Toney who were just snubbed one year and then got through in the next. I mean, the guys who have not made it for years like Nunn and Benn. Speaking to Nunn, how do you think he does against the 4 kings and Mccallum? Let me also throw in another mythical matchup, Hearns vs Trinidad at 154. How do you think these fights go.
Regards, Saurabh
Bread’s Response: You named two fighters that I watched in their primes. Michael Nunn and Nigel Benn are HOF level fighters. So is Marlon Starling, who is not on the ballot. I also believe Chris Eubank and Steve Collins deserve strong consideration. But I will throw one out that doesn’t get brought up. Meldrick Taylor. I love Buddy McGirt and I’m not suggesting he’s not a HOF, he’s a great fighter. But Meldrick Taylor did everything Buddy McGirt did and he stopped him head to head in their primes. They both won titles at 140 and 147. They have similar number of title defenses. Again, Meldrick beat him head to head. And Meldrick took the #1 P4P fighter in the world in Julio Cesar Chavez to hell. He won 9 or 10 rounds from Chavez in their unification fight, who needed a little help to win their 1st fight.
McGirt has more fights but he lost their last titles in 92 for Meldrick and 93 for McGirt and never regained them. I feel like Meldrick deserves more consideration as a HOF.
Michael Nunn would have faired really well vs the 4 Kings. They are from different eras. He’s a lot younger than them. By the time Nunn turned pro, they were all great fighters and basically HOF. The closest he is in age to any of them is Tommy Hearns. But Hearns had almost 40 fights by the time Nunn turned pro. So Nunn ascended in the mid to late 80s when the 4 Kings were inactive and slowing down. So yes a 6’1 southpaw many years younger, with elite boxing ability would have given those guys fits at that time. I hold Nunn in high regard as a head to head fighter. He’s difficult. Think Demetrius Andrade of this era, but probably slightly better. James Toney’s WIN over Nunn is one of the best WINS of that decade.
Nunn and McCallum are basically of the same era in terms of when they ascended. They were both middleweight champions and RING rated top fighters at the same time for many years. I think would have been a 50/50 fight. The same sharp little shots that Toney hit Nunn with, McCallum would have hit him with. From 1987-92 McCallum was one of the 10 best fighters in the world as was Nunn. And those are the exact times the fight would have been viable. I’m tempted to say Nunn by decision but McCallum that fought Toney and Watson would have been right with Nunn. Great fight. I wished we got to see it.
Hearns vs Trinidad is one of the best fights you can make at 154 lbs. Tito doesn’t get credit for being a top 10 junior middleweight ever. But like Hearns he never lost at 154. And he was simply brutal in the division. He just didn’t stay long. I lean Hearns but not by as much as most historians. Hearns had two distinct weakness that were Tito’s strength. Hearns’s left hook was nasty but his arms were so long that if you hooked with him, you could catch him. If you watch closely at both Leonard fights. The 6th round of the 1st fight and 5th round of the rematch. Leonard clips Hearns with a hook at Hearns is also hooking. Tito had as good a hook as you will ever see. Tito also was a better midrange fighter. The issue would be getting in that range without getting shredded with arguably the best jab and right hand in history. I say Hearns wins but man he would have had to earn it from the 2000 version of Tito.
Bread,
Magsayo outlanded GRJ by over 2 to 1, yet the consensus was Mark close or maybe a draw. Manny outlanded Horn by the same ratio yet Jeff got the judges to believe he won that fight. In your mind, what does it take for a fighter to win a fight that he lands half as many punches and doesn’t put his opponent down?
Jeremy
Bread’s Response: I don’t have a thought on your specific question because that’s not how a fight is supposed to be scored. You can’t compare two fights with similar punch stats because a fight isn’t judged on punch stats and judges don’t know what the punch stats are. The punch stats may be an indicator of what happened but it isn’t the determining factor. A fight is scored on Clean Punching, Effective Aggressiveness, Defense and Ring Generalship. The only one that needs explanation is Ring Generalship, which means who is dictating the fight. Who’s controlling the action. I think Manny beat Jeff Horne. But Horne mauled and dirty boxed Manny at times which made him feel uncomfortable. Ring Generalship. Maybe the judges thought Horne was fighting his fight, more than Manny was fighting his. I don’t know……..Try your best to not judge a fight, by looking at another fight. Judge a fight by the 4 criterion I gave you. Along with saying to yourself, who would I rather be in “that round.” “THAT ROUND” is the most important thing you can say to yourself because fights are judged on individual rounds. Not a carry over effect.
I think Manny Pacquiao’s losses to Tim Bradley and Jeff Horne are considered BIGGER robberies than they may be because Manny won his rounds by a bigger margin and was more dynamic than they won theirs. So people judge a fight as if it’s one big 36 minute contest and it isn’t. It’s also not a street fight where if you beat the guy up worse than he beat you up, you won. It’s not like that. It’s individual rounds. So often times the average fan does not realize this and he gives more credit to the fighter who wins his rounds by a bigger margin. Unless it’s a 2 point round because one fighter was brutalized or knocked down, the round is just 10-9. This also interconnects to Punch Stats.
The total punch stats can be off if for example Fighter A lands 20 punches in 5 rounds and Fighter B only lands 8. Then in 7 rounds Fighter B lands 12 punches and Fighter A lands 11. Let’s say the judges gives Fighter B 7 rounds and Fighter A 5. The total punch stats will be Fighter A landing 177 punches and Fighter B landing 124. But Fighter B wins the fight. Don’t get me wrong that scenario is unlikely but it’s highly possible and it does happen. That’s why you have to be careful if punch stats are your determining factor because there should be no carry over effect in a fight. I hope I was able to help and explain that in layman’s terms.
Bread, This fight has a Berto-Ortiz feel to it. Do you see any similarities?
Bread’s Response: You were referring to Thurman vs Barrios. I thought it did. I thought Thurman would be rusty after a 2 ½ year lay off. I thought his style would be off because of how much he moves. But man I am very impressed with Thurman and I was wrong. His body looked spectacular. His timing was ON. And most importantly he was more EFFICIENT with his style which he wasn’t always. I thought at times in Thurman’s career he over moved. In this fight he moved but he didn’t let Barrios carry him too fast. Thurman put some HEAT on Barrios early and he tamed him.
Keith is an intelligent guy and I assume he knows he was forced to move too much in certain fights. So he made sure he hit Mario with some big punches to the head and body early. Barrios was MOVING forward at times. But he wasn’t COMING forward. He wasn’t what you call BRINGING serious heat for 12 rounds. I’m a fan of Barrios, he’s a nice kid and a good fighter. I’m just being honest. Barrios was a little conservative in his approach to a fighter you can’t lay back from. Pacquiao and Porter attacked Thurman more viciously. They took punishment but they attacked him, which caused discomfort. Thurman gets power from his momentum he builds up by stepping in. Mario is simply not talented enough to lay back and box Thurman. Mario is taller but he’s doesn’t get off quicker than Thurman. So Thurman has the advantage boxing. In order for Mario to have won, he would have had to put more pressure on Thurman and increase the volume of his jab. Now it’s easier to say from the outside, I totally get it. Thurman was hitting him with big punches and all punches hurt. I’m not criticizing Mario. Thurman is just a better fighter. I’m just pointing out that Mario could not win that fight with a laid back temperament. He has to attack more to take advantage of the flaws. But again, it’s not so easy when the type of HEAT that Thurman throws is coming at you. Credit to both fighters. Thurman must have had a wonderful camp to look that sharp after 2 ½ years off. And Mario showed some serious durability. He took a terrible beating to the head and body and he never went down. The type of beating he took, is actually concerning moving forward.
Based on Thurman’s performance, what do you think his chances are against Ugas, Spence and Crawford? He fought well but I can’t help to think that Gervonta Davis stopped Barrios and Thurman couldn’t knock him down. Also With Spence vs Ugas reportedly going to take place in April do you think Crawford vs Thurman will happen?
Bread’s Response: You know what I want to tip my hat to Keith Thurman. That was the best I have ever seen him look and I have seen at least 12 of his fights in their entirety. I don’t know if Barrios was the perfect style or if it was all Thurman but I have to give him credit. Thurman is 7 years older and he’s been inactive. He looked sensational in my opinion. The one criticism I had of Thurman was sometimes he over moved in fights. In this fight, he moved but he didn’t burn himself or allow himself to be carried too fast. Great Job. I know Tank Davis stopped Barrios. But I don’t like triangle theories. That fight was at 140lbs. When you shrink down in weight, sometimes it compromises your punch resistance. Davis is also a southpaw so maybe Barrios didn’t see the punches as well. Maybe the extra size allowed Barrios to absorb the punches better. Maybe Davis is a better puncher than Thurman who hasn’t really stopped anyone lately. You also have to factor in the boxing and rounds being won. I feel like Davis got Barrios in more trouble and was able to stop him. But I also feel Thurman boxed better and controlled more rounds than Davis did. Just because Davis stopped Barrios it doesn’t mean he outperformed Thurman vs Barrios. You have to look deeper. Thurman really performed.
I think Thurman’s chances increased vs the 3 champions. I think he will be more confident. I think he needed that type of performance. He would give all 3 trouble. But that doesn’t mean he would beat them. But I think he would trouble them. The question would be can he tame them like he did Mario. I think all 3 are better athletes than Mario and I also believe they have a more vicious temperament. So when Thurman lands his sharp hard punches, I feel like they are going to fight harder to take the play away from him. Where as Barrios sort of fought a measured and settled fight. I believe Thurman would have to fight all 3 men harder. I’m not saying he can’t fight hard for 12 rounds. But I think he would have to fight harder from an energy burning standpoint than he did vs Barrios. I don’t want to start making picks for fights that are not even signed yet. But if I were making odds, I would make Thurman even money vs Ugas. A +175 underdog vs Spence. And a +250 underdog vs Crawford. That’s not a pick but I think those would be the odds.
Sup Breadman,
Did you watch Eubank Jnr vs Williams last week? Many observers commented on how he seemed to be copying/using a Roy Jones type style, different from the more pressing volume-oriented style he has had before. Do you think this is good for Eubank? What do you think about former fighters that are now trainers trying to get their guys to fight in a similar way? Are there many examples of this you can think of that have been successful or not?
I also wanted to ask about Beterbiev. I believe he is a top 10 p4p fighter today. However, sadly, I have to assume he is past his peak due to his age and style. With the thought we’ve seen the best of him in mind, where do you see him in terms of recent great heavyweights? How would he fair vs a prime Kovalev or Ward or even RJJ? Is he someone that won’t get the recognition he deserves because he hasn’t been as active in the spotlight as others?
Finally, the Fury-Whyte is set and for us UK guys it is a HUGE fight. Both have big fan bases and capture a lot of attention both in the ring and out. Of course, Fury is the favourite, but I feel he will need to change his gameplan from the mauling he gave Wilder, because Whyte will be able to handle that better. Whyte has out-mauled Jospeh Parker and Oscar Rivas. He has a Muay Thai background and a natural strength about him that make him better than most at clinching and smothering. Do you think Fury will need to revert to his stick-and-move style to beat Whyte? Does Whyte have a good chance vs Fury?
God bless sir!
Bread’s Response: I love Roy Jones as a fighter and trainer. It will be hard for me to ever criticize him. Roy gets a bad rap. They say he doesn’t have fundamentals. He has fundamentals and an extreme IQ. He’s a genius and he’s unconventional. Roy deserves more credit for the job he did with Bryant Perella vs Tony Harrison. Perella really performed. Roy is doing a good job with Eubank. Eubank doesn’t have his agility or left hook so he won’t be a carbon copy of Roy but I see some of Roy’s work in you Eubank. Most ex fighters give their fighters at least pieces of their styles. They also like guys who have similar body types and fight in the similar divisions. It’s just how it is. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.
I believe Artur Beterbiev is a great fighter. He’s a heavy handed pressure technician with a monstrous personality. He’s Jason Vorhees. I don’t know if he’s past his best day but he’s still performing at a top level. His victory over Marcus Browne was impressive. Browne came to win. I think Beterbiev is slightly overlooked. I think Prime Roy and Ward edge out decisions over him. I think he comes from behind and stops Kovalev.
I think Fury is an adaptable fighter. His mind is so advanced he can morph into what he needs to be. I feel like Fury will adapt and just be a better fighter than Whyte. Aside from a heavyweight punch on the button, I don’t think Whyte can beat Fury. But that’s why they fight the fights.
Bread,
I can’t see how Pac-Man vs Loma 135 plays out. Is Manny able to use his mutant speed to blaze an Uber talented Loma? Or can Loma somehow use his footwork and rare technique to bewilder an in-and-out Manny? A prime Pac-Man wastes Loma, in my opinion, but Manny wasn’t apex at 135 (or maybe the very beginning of his apex). I’d love to hear how you see this one playing out.
Mark Stoy, Columbus Ohio
Bread’s Response: Manny did have an APEX performance at 135lb vs David Diaz in 2008. He was 29. Same age roughly as Loma when he fought Linares. Manny didn’t stay at 135lbs long but that was the beginning of his crazy run in which he clinched the fighter of the decade in the 2010s.I also think very highly of Loma. He would trouble Manny because Loma can cut angles with Manny. Loma is just as talented, he’s neater and he’s a better infighter. Manny has more raw athleticism and more firepower. I don’t think Manny dominates him as you do. I think Loma takes him to the brink. But I feel like although they are similar in height, Manny has more range. Manny actually is a great outside fighter. He covers lots of ground with his 1-2. That would bother Loma because Loma is a mid range and infighter. It’s why he had so much trouble with Teofimo Lopez and Jorge Linares. Manny is more deadly than both, with a bigger arsenal. So I think that would be the deciding factor. Let’s say Manny by decision. However, Loma is better than most people think. He’s on the level of the best guys ever from 126-130. And he’s strong enough and tough enough to hold his own at 135lbs vs the field.
Hello Breadman ,
The welterweight division is getting more interesting . After the Spence Ugas fight , which Spence will win easily. Spence will have three belts and Crawford one . As I see it , there are three major players , Crawford , Spence , and Ennis . Will we finally get the unification from Crawford and Spence , or will Spence fight Ennis . Do not be shocked if Spence moves up to Jr MW and Crawford wont fight Ennis . I just do not understand why Crawford Spence has not happened .
It is by far the most lucrative fight at WW . I hope Ennis wins it all , he seems willing to fight . I now hear rumors that my man Canelo might fight Bivol . I have heard me may pick Charlo . I do see Bivol as the easier fight . Canelo wins this fight easily . That is another division that the champions wont fight each other . As fans we want Beterbiev Bivol . Is there a bigger fight to be made at LHW . I wont even ask about the LW divisions , the four kings that wont fight each other . Valdez is going to fight Stevenson , Stevenson wins big .
Thank You,
J.B.
Bread’s Response: One fight at a time my friend. Spence vs Ugas is a big fight for 3 of the 4 belts. Besides Canelo, Ugas may be on the best hot streak in boxing. He’s won 14 of his last 15 with just a controversial decision loss to Shawn Porter. So let’s see who wins that fight. I have no idea if Spence vs Crawford will ever happen. I also don’t know if either will fight Ennis. But I do believe Ennis will be champion by the end of this year. I think he will fight for a vacant belt. I think he’s tired of waiting around.
Now, I will disagree with you slightly. I think 147 is a 5 man race. Spence, Crawford and Ennis you named. But Thurman proved himself to be a player last Saturday and Vergil Ortiz is also coming. None of these 5 men have fought so we can assume who would win but we don’t know for sure. Again I will agree with you on Spence. Out of all of these fighters Spence fought at the heaviest weight as an amateur 152lbs. So he’s the one who moved down to fight as a pro at 147lbs. So I do see him moving up pretty soon. I don’t know if anyone will fight Artur Beterbiev if they don’t have to. He’s a MONSTER. He’s ageing but he’s a monster. He doesn’t have to try to punch hard in order to punch hard. No one has been able to see the final bell against him. Knowing what I know about boxing, I think they may wait him out another year or two. Beterbiev is an underrated great fighter.
Hello Breadman ,
I am a huge Canelo fan . Not just his boxing , but all around how smart he is . His management team , his trainer Eddy Reynoso , and how he easily navigates around the divisions to his advantage . He does what other teams cant or wont do . I look at amazement how he cleaned the SMW Division . The fighters he faced and how he beat them . And how he avoided the biggest threat in Benavidez . How does a Champion belt holder lose his title twice , once for drugs , and for not making weight . It is a little uncanny , check the dates , on when Canelo won the titles .
Plant , Saunders , Smith . Three fights to win all four belts . And there are no HOF names on any of those three guys records . Sure they are what is there , Only Canelo , with superior matchmaking and management could pull that off . He is not only the best fighter , he is the best business man . He only makes smart decisions . He beats Bivol easy , he has waited GGG out till he is now forty . He wont fight Beterbiev , just too risky . The Charlo fight maybe a risk , but Canelo just has to keep it close to get a decision . I do not see Charlo knocking out Canelo .
The Benavidez fight maybe the toughest , but why isnt that fight being talked about , something does not smell right about that . Anyway , just food for thought . Also please tell me if I come to Philly , which shop has the best philly cheese steak in Philly .
Thank You,
J.B.
Bread’s Response: Lot’s of good Cheese Steak places in Philly. Um…..I like Ish Kabibbles. I also like this Italian Place near Passyunk Ave. It’s not as popular as some but just as good.
When you’re in Canelo’s position you are the straw that stirs the drink. So he can get to choose to unify when he wants and literally pick who he wants to fight. I’m not mad at him because that’s a pedestal he has EARNED. Canelo is a great fighter. Manny Pacquiao was able to do this in late 2000s. Floyd Mayweather was able to do this after he defeated Oscar De La Hoya. Oscar was able to do this after he defeated Pernell Whitaker. Mike Tyson was able to do this after he unified the heavyweight division. Ray Leonard was able to do this after he defeated Marvin Hagler. This is nothing new. But fans of these fighters don’t like to admit that some matchmaking does take place.
I like it when it’s a mix of money and legacy. I think Canelo has been giving us a reasonable mix of it. Smith, Plant and Saunders were all undefeated. And it’s not Canelo’s fault that Benavidez lost his title twice without losing a fight. So if Canelo was an opportunist, so what. Benavidez gave him the opportunity. And this is coming from someone who thinks very highly of David Benavidez. I think he’s approaching top 10 P4P status. That kid can GO. But the truth is the truth. And Canelo didn’t make him lose his titles. In fact because he did lose his titles the way he did. His possible opponents will hold it against him. Benavidez is a monster and he gave fighters a reason to duck him. That’s just how this era is.
I was just debating with people between Bivol and Charlo. Bivol was a better amateur and he may be a more difficult fight. But Charlo is meaner man and he would make it a HARDER fight. Charlo is violent and physically tough. I’m not saying he would win but he would fight a determined fight. I don’t know the type of fight Bivol would fight. From what I have seen of him, he’s an elite boxer who doesn’t like contact. Canelo may have a chance at intimidating him. I’m not suggesting who is the better opponent. They both have to prove it. I just think the fights are different and Charlo would be the more exciting fight.
But let me go deeper on what you’re suggesting about Canelo. You’re pretty much calling him a shot caller. I honestly don’t have an issue with that. My issue is when a fighter who hasn’t EARNED it gets that treatment. Jaime Munguia and Ryan Garcia are both young talented undefeated fighters and they are both being allowed to flow like Canelo before they fought the tough fights that Canelo did. I don’t want to use the word FAIR because nothing is fair in this world. We have to earn our level playing field.
But Munguia is 38-0. He last fought at 154 in 2019. He fights on DAZN with middleweight champions GGG and Andrade who fought on DAZN. And he’s still fighting non title fights when he could get a title shot whenever he wanted. This sets a trend and fighters become harder to deal with. Because Canelo won’t be the example that they bring up. They will bring up Munguia.
Ryan Garcia is a super talent. I believe he’s right there with Haney, Lopez and Davis. But all of them have fought for world titles. Garcia has had multiple opportunities to fight big fights and for a title. He won an eliminator for the WBC title vs Luke Campbell. And we haven’t got one big fight or title attempt out of him. Again it doesn’t set a good example when fighters who haven’t proven to be great fighters or HOF get this special treatment.
I don’t understand the dynamic behind this. Demetrius Andrade and Devin Haney get loads of criticism for not fighting elite opponents etc etc. But they are the champions in their divisions with Munguia and Garcia as the challengers. And the champions are expected to chase down the challengers to GIVE them opportunities. When things get devalued and turned upside down this bad it’s no bueno. So to be specific. I have no issue with Canelo as far as his opponents. He’s the BOSS. Picking Bivol over Charlo is a preference not a duck. The possible opponents should fight each other to eliminate Canelo’s options. I have always said that. However, I do think David Benavidez will try to force the fight through the WBC and if it doesn’t happen…..that may turn into a duck.
But all in all, Canelo has earned this treatment. He’s delivered for about a decade. Some fights were showcase fights. Some were real. But he delivered. Munguia and Garcia are excellent fighters but they haven’t delivered no where near what Canelo has. Canelo fought Austin Trout in a unification when he was 22. Floyd Mayweather the #1 P4P fighter at 23. And Erislandy Lara an elite pure boxer at 24. So you can’t tell me how young Munguia and Garcia are when you defend their level of opposition and they this treatment and Canelo took heavy smoke at their same age to earn it. The accomplishments, should match the popularity and market value in order to get this treatment. If one of the three components are off, then it’s not warranted.
Send Questions to dabreadman25@hotmail.com