GGG vs Murray Predition & much much more.....

I read you final comment in your last mailbag. You said Manny and PBF not fighting was the worst thing to happen in boxing. I thought about it and saw these things as worst not in order. 1) Mayweather fighting a series of boxers that had no chance to beat him. It makes his fight lack suspense and they become sparring bouts. 2) The fear fighters had during RJJ and Iron Mike's prime. Those fights were ugly cause watching scared fighters is a tough sale for a fan. 3) Letting Ali fight when it was clear he wasn't right and done.

I am not going to make the gimmie of the racist policies that effected the sport. But tell me which of the three things I mentioned hurt boxing the most.

Keep doing our city proud!!

Namaste

Wil Munny
Bread’s Response: When I said Mayweather vs Pacquiao NOT happening is the worst thing that could happen to boxing, I was talking figuratively not literally although I meant what I said. Obviously black fighters not being able to fight for titles at the turn of the century is much worse.


Now I will address specifically what you mentioned. The fear fighters had of RJJ and Mike Tyson should not be on the list. Those were two of the most exciting guys in the sport’s history and the fear opponents had for them is not a valid example as one of the worst things that could happen in boxing.


Yes I agree allowing Ali to fight Larry Holmes then Trevor Berbick was out right disgusting and should have never happened. The most popular fighter in the history of the sport cannot be exploited like that.


Mayweather fighting a series of no hope opponents is a direct result of him not fighting Manny Pacquiao….
Now let me explain why in full detail why Mayweather and Pacquiao NOT fighting is such a bad thing. Boxers follow their predecessors….Ali lined up killers and attempted to slay them. The most popular fighter after Ali was Ray Leonard and he did the same exact thing. The most popular fighter after Ray Leonard was Oscar De La Hoya and he did the same exact thing. No two careers are exact but I’m sure you get what I’m saying.


Now in this era, we have a so called “Cold War” that didn’t exist until one fight was attempted to be made. We have an era of boxers who openly talk about “business” decisions instead of letting their handlers take care of those things behind the scene. In this era because these two great fighters have not fought, it sets an example that it’s ok to miss your most threatening contemporary. We are in an era of non formal boxing leagues, where you can literally duck your rivals by simply signing with a power broker of another league. On top of that we are in an era where drug testing seems great on the surface but the testing has been exploited to a point where no one really trusts the results. All of this negativity is from one bout NOT happening…
Last but not least when the biggest fight in boxing history is not made it can’t be a good thing.

 

 

 

Breadman,
 
I can't wait for 3/7 and 4/11....regarding garcia vs peterson I  think Danny is great for boxing (young, skilled, good looking, well spoken), but I also am a fan of Peterson.  It seems like all are picking Danny.   How much of a chance does Peterson have (40%?)?   More importantly I am grappling with what is his best strategy to win?   I think he may be faster than Danny and have as good or better boxing skills, but from a distance I think Danny will catch him with a knockout hook.   On the other hand, Peterson is very good in the pocket but Danny has the more powerful hook and seemingly stronger beard.....help me out but I'm leaning towards staying in close as Lamont seems more fluid at running combinations, moving laterally and slipping in close.
 
Also, I thought Lamont should've went to '04 olympics over rock allen based on cleveland boxoffs.     Whatever happened to Rock does he fight, serve as a sparring partner or help train others?
 
Billy Bomaye
Bread’s Response: Rock Allen was in an auto accident and he had to retire from boxing undefeated. His father Naazim Richardson still trains fighters in our home gym.


I think Garcia vs Peterson is 60/40 to 65/35 in favor of Danny. Danny has showed a clutch gene to overcome pretty much every obstacle in his career. Lamont is an excellent fighter but he hasn’t shined in his toughest spots like Danny has.


I think their speed is comparable and neither guy has a decided advantage in that area. But Danny has a decided advantage in his ability to land his hardest punches in the MIX. They have a similar number of kos but I think Danny is the much better puncher. I think Lamont’s best strategy is to use a jab as his primary weapon. Danny has a squared up stance and he stands upright. You won’t defend a jab well squared up and upright. If you are squared up should have to be crouching and bobbing like Henry Armstrong and Joe Frazier. Lamont should not over punch. He should work the jab overtime and quell Danny’s violent outburst. You put fire out with water not fire.

 

 

 

Instead of testing for when people are on steroids. They could test for low testosterone which is inevitable if you cycle at all. Once someone tests for low test, they should put them on random testing under suspicion. Some guys who have naturally low test may be offended but I'm sure they would rather play on an even field. Bhop would probably be the only elite pro that tests low due to his age. Just a thought
 
DJ
Bread’s Response: Thanks bro we need your assistance in catching cheats.

 

 

Hey Stephen,
 
(this isn't necessarily for publication but...)
 
I started reading your column a few years ago.  At first, I liked it a little but was put off a bit by some of the terminology that you use (feel me?) most likely because I'm an old coot so it's probably a generational thing.  However, as time went on, I not only began to REALLY like your column but recently, when you went from weekly  to every couple of weeks, I was in major withdrawal and was checking for it every day.  I hope that you go back to a weekly column because having "Daily Bread" every two weeks isn't working for me.
 
OK, my question relates to what might also be a generational issue.  Left hook, right hook - I'm old school and when I boxed and up until just the past few years, a right handed boxer could throw ONLY a left hook and a southpaw could ONLY throw a right hook.  The past ?? 10 or 15 years, I've been hearing people referring to an orthodox fighter throwing right hooks or a southpaw throwing left hooks.  I say that is impossible!  A righty can ONLY throw a left hook.  He can throw a straight right, an overhand right or a looping right but in order for him to throw a right hook, he'd have to turn around to a southpaw stance.
 
A few years ago, I debated this via email with Doveed Linder and we had a spirited (but respectful) exchange and we agreed to disagree.  To verify how correct I was, I even checked with a good friend of mine named Harold Lederman who knows a thing or two about boxing and he agreed that in order to throw a right hook, a boxer would have to be in the southpaw stance.
 
What say you, Mr. Edwards?
 
 
Best Regards,
Bread’s Response:  Thanks for the kind words. There a few reasons why my mailbag has not been put as often. One is I am full time trainer now and it requires lots of time and travel. But the main reason is I am overwhelmed with Pacquioa vs Mayweather comments. I can only post what I am sent and I refuse to post all comments related to the two superstars. 80% of my emails are about Pacquioa and Mayweather.


To answer you about the right hook. I think you are being technical with the terminology. A looping right hand could be the same thing as a right hook from a right handed fighter but if you refuse to call it a right hook that’s fine, I get it. But I know lots of good technical fighters who will throw a right hook or looping right hand. Look at Bernard Hopkin’s ko of Tito Trinidad and tell me what you think that was. Or better yet look at Julian Jackson’s ko of Herol Graham.
I know you are old school but you may have to be open minded about this. I actually argued with Julian Williams for 2 years about throwing a right hook. He refused to do it. Then he fought a kid named Jonel Tapia and he forced a stoppage with a series of right hooks. In his last fight which is on youtube he kod Jamar Freeman with a series of right hook. If you want to call them looping right hands I wouldn’t argue….
Great question.

 

 

 

What do you think of GGG vs Martin Murray? Will this shut up his critics or will it add fuel to the fire?
Bread’s Response: Golovkin’s competition is not as bad as some of his critics make it out to be.  No one is saying he has a HOF resume because he doesn’t. But he has decisively defeated the best available opponent consistently. More importantly the two lineal champions who have reigned since he came into prominence have avoided him. So have ALL of the other champions at 160lbs.


So I ask the critics to be specific. Don’t tell me GGG has not fought anybody. Tell me who he missed that wanted to fight him. HBO is so desperate to find an opponent, any viable guy can get the fight. But none of them want it. Now I will give Miguel Cotto a slight pass, he doesn’t have to fight GGG in his very first defense. But he should as a champion give the best contender to his throne a shot within a reasonable period of time.


I think Martin Murray is solid. I think he’s very tough and he seems like a big kid. He’s not overwhelmingly good in any area giving him the eyeball test but maybe he’s overwhelming in areas that are only obvious under dire conditions. Mayeb he’s a killer on the inside and refuses to be intimidated. Maybe he can take inhumane punishment. I don’t know.


My pick is GGG by  6th round ko. Murray does not have a built in defense to stop Golovkin’s body assault.

 

 

What's good bread? Hope all is well with you and j-rock. Just wanted to pick your boxing mind for a second, who has the better resume Muhammed Ali, Oscar Dela hoya, Evander Holyfield or Sugar Ray Leonard? What I mean by resume is quality of fighter, at what stage was that elite level fight at in his career, wins in major fights or 50/50 type fights factored in with missed fights that would have been extra tough or huge fights? Also what do you think is next for guys like Boo Andrade and karl dargan? 1 is coming off a 1 sided lost and the other wont get in the ring. Peace and good luck with everything you got planned

Bread’s Response: All have great resumes but Ali’s is the best. Leonard and Holyfield can argue over 2nd place. Leonard has the distinction of the only man to defeat the p4p best fighter 3x in Duran, Hearns and Hagler but he doesn’t have the quantity to best Ali. De La Hoya’s was also outstanding but he lost too many of his big fights.


Ali’s resume is almost impeccable. Besides not soundly defeating Ken Norton what can you say about Ali? He has NO misses. He fought Archie Moore, Sonny Liston, Floyd Patterson, Joe Frazier, Bob Foster,Ken Norton, George Foreman and Larry Holmes. That’s 8 Hall of Famers that’s more than any heavyweight in history.


He fought Patterson, Frazier, Foreman and Spinks, Making him the only heavyweight in history to beat 4 Olympic Gold medalists as pros.


He fought tough fights in his opponent’s hometown like the Norton fight in San Diego, Chuvalo in Canada and Cooper fight in England. He often fought his toughest opponents multiple times to clear up who was the best.
And he fought 13 past, current or future world champions. Ali has a top 5 resume in the history of boxing.


 

G

Send questions and comments to: dabreadman25@hotmail.com