In this week\u2019s mailbag, trainer Stephen \u201cBreadman\u201d Edwards discusses Saul “Canelo” Alvarez, Muhammad Ali, Sonny Liston, Timothy Bradley, Naoya Inoue and Manny Pacquiao.<\/p>\n
Rolando Romero is not seen as a technical boxer at all, yet he completely outclassed Ryan Garcia. Ismael Salas got that effort out of Romero in a very short period of time and helped create one of the biggest upsets in recent memory. So, my question is this: is Ismael Salas the front runner for trainer of the year?<\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: I don\u2019t know who\u2019s the front runner as the trainer of the year. But Ismael Salas is my guy and he\u2019s an excellent trainer. One of the best in the world in my opinion. The candidate for trainer of the year is usually the trainer whose fighter won the biggest fight. The trainer of the fighter who scores the biggest upset. Or the trainer of the fighter who had the best performance. So Rolly winning a fight, no one expected him to win, is definitely a feather in Salas\u2019s hat. Good for him, I hope he wins it.<\/p>\n
Hi Breadman. Canelo vs Scull, wow. Scull sold out big time! I’ve never seen someone so happy to lose! The strange thing is that there’s an argument there for Scull winning that fight. From what I saw Scull had the ability to make it an easy win. His timing, ability and quality were greater than Canelo’s, but his choices\/actions were shocking. Canelo, unfortunately, appears a shadow of his former self, which is a serious shame. Based on what we just saw Bud takes him apart and wins comfortably, by stoppage if he wants to. It’s a shame because people will inevitably say Canelo was shot, but I believe Bud would have beaten Canelo clean at any time during his career with correct preparation and judges. As with the Spence fight, it sadly seems like Bud will never receive the adulation he deserves, when we are witnessing an ATG before us, that few seem willing to recognise.<\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: I don\u2019t ever want to talk about William Scull again. I don\u2019t care what anyone says, that was not boxing, that was running. The crazy part about it is, Canelo was there for the taking that night. You can tell he didn\u2019t train that hard and he wasn\u2019t engaged. He didn\u2019t even feel like putting forth the effort to chase Scull. If Scull would\u2019ve just settled down in the second half of the fight, and let his hands go, he could\u2019ve won. But now, no one will care or even make a case for him to have won, because of how poorly he fought. <\/p>\n
Personally I will give Canelo and Bud full credit for a win or performance. Just because a man is smaller than you, or fought at a lower weight, doesn\u2019t mean he\u2019s an easier fight than opponents your size. For example, Bud is a tougher fight for Canelo than Rocky Fielding. But Fielding is bigger. A smaller fighter that can take a good punch, is very difficult for a bigger fighter if the smaller fighter is more agile and has better conditioning. <\/p>\n
The style of both fighters also has to be considered. For example, Bob Foster and Michael Spinks had no shots vs Joe Frazier and Mike Tyson because of the frenetic pressure Frazier and Tyson applied. But Michael Spinks and Ray Leonard did well vs Larry Holmes and Marvin Hagler because Holmes boxed and Hagler\u2019s pressure was methodical and not frenetic. <\/p>\n
Canelo is methodical at this point of his career. He\u2019s also shorter than Bud with less length and stamina. This is a very difficult fight for Canelo style wise. I also will give Bud credit for winning. Bud is 37 years old and he\u2019s jumping two weight divisions to fight an ATG super middleweight in Canelo, who is undefeated at the weight. If Bud wins, he deserves his props. Especially if the betting lines have him as an underdog. You can\u2019t discredit a win a fighter gets as an underdog.<\/p>\n
Mr Edwards, I appreciate your response to my question about Liston vs Clay\/Ali. Your explanation about Liston being a plodder leading with his shoulder blade was really great!!! Thank you for that!!! What I did not appreciate was you saying my opinion was \u201casinine\u201d. I\u2019m not sure it\u2019s good business to insult your loyal readers. But what is \u201casinine\u201d is you saying Liston \u201ccould have gotten up\u201d. \u00a0Liston DID get up. \u00a0And it wasn\u2019t the timekeeper who called Walcott over to stop the fight, it was Nat Fleischer, a journalist. And \u00a0I\u2019ve heard of \u201cquick counts\u201d before but never a \u201cno count\u201d. \u00a0Was Liston supposed to be counting while on the canvas? It\u2019s obvious you think Ali was \u201cthe greatest\u201d. That\u2019s fine. \u00a0I don\u2019t. But if you repeat something often enough it suddenly becomes \u201ctrue\u201d. As far as \u201cmental gymnastics\u201d, it always amazed me that Ali referred to many of his opponents as \u201cbums\u201d. \u00a0How does somebody become \u201cthe greatest\u201d by beating, by his own admission, \u201cbums\u201d? Ali was the \u201cA list\u201d before it became a thing. \u00a0The hotly disputed Doug Jones decision, the \u201csplit glove\u201d in the Cooper fight, the statement by Foreman a few years ago, \u201cAli still hasn\u2019t beat Ken Norton\u201d, the loose ropes in Zaire, the Shavers decision, etc. You said Ali had \u201ccharacter\u201d. \u00a0I assume you meant in the ring, which I admit I have no idea what you mean by that. But I\u2019m not sure there is a lot of character involved when he referred to opponents as \u201cthe washerwoman\u201d, the \u201crabbit\u201d, an \u201cUncle Tom\u201d, and Frazier as a \u201cgorilla\u201d, especially after Frazier went to bat for Ali with President Nixon to give Ali a chance to fight again. You and I must have a different definition of \u201ccharacter\u201d. Last point: I think Ali was a great fighter, just not \u201cthe greatest\u201d. That is my opinion. And I, nor your loyal readers, need to be insulted for having an opinion different than yours. Oh, and your prediction that Garcia would knock Rolly out \u201cwithin 3 rounds\u201d was \u201casinine\u201d. Curt Omaha<\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: My pick about Garcia knocking out Rolly was wrong. It wasn\u2019t asinine. Learn the definition before you try to insult me about a wrong pick, that I\u2019m actually happy I was wrong about. You\u2019re way too sensitive to write into a boxing mailbag. But ok, let’s go\u2026 I didn\u2019t call your opinion asinine. I answered your question and gave a detailed explanation. I said all of the mental gymnastics of trying to get Sonny Liston a hypothetical win over a fighter who stopped him twice in Muhammad Ali was asinine. <\/p>\n
If I remember correctly, you wanted to take the Liston that beat Cleveland Williams in 1960 and match him vs Cassius Clay, the young Ali of 1964. And you favored that Liston over Ali. But you favored the Ali who beat Cleveland Williams in 1966 to beat Liston. Well, In my opinion you had to do too much to get Liston a win. <\/p>\n
Liston was not old or shot when he fought Ali. He was on his best career run. He was a 7 to 1 favorite to beat a gold medalist in Ali so somebody thought really highly of Sonny’s chances when they fought. And Ali made him quit. I was being respectful towards you by even answering the question. But again you did too much. I understand it\u2019s a hypothetical scenario but come on bro. <\/p>\n
As far as where I rank Ali, I can see you\u2019re not the biggest Ali fan. And you have a right to feel that way. But again you\u2019re a sensitive dude. Ali called his opponents bums. So what! They can fight him and show him that they aren\u2019t bums. He didn\u2019t call them bums and ducked them. He called them bums and fought them. Big difference. Ali is the epitome of character. If I need to explain that to you, you won\u2019t get an explanation today. But fighting the killers he fought, in the era he fought them in, going through what he went through, is character. <\/p>\n
Remember something: Ali took way more punishment in certain fights in his career than Liston took vs him and he never quit or laid on the canvas to exaggerate being hurt more than he was. That’s character! Liston was a bad dude but he wasn’t willing to give as much of himself as Ali was. And you know it! That’s why you have to do all of these time machine scenarios to get Liston an imaginary win.<\/p>\n
Oh and one more thing. If you could do anything in life, as well as Ali could fight, some people may call you the greatest also. And they would talk about you 50 years after your career was over, like you\u2019re talking about him 50 years after his career was over. Peace!<\/p>\n
What’s good Bread. Thank you for taking your time out to answer questions. Hopefully they’re compensating you well lol. There\u2019s few people whose boxing opinion I value. You aka Black Bert Sugar, Greg Hackett, Tarver and Sean Zittel. Y’all are able to articulate what you see to the casual fan and add context which a lot of people lack. Greg has become one of my favorites. He knows the game. Haney rarely seems rooted in himself unless it’s vs guys smaller & the over movement is off-putting. Teo is a great athlete that’s a boxer & not the other way around. He does a lot of stuff that’s flash but no substance. Once he realized Barboza was not on his level, he should’ve hurt him or got him outta there. That’s what truly sets the elite from the very good. Usyk, Bud, Inoue, Bivol let you know they’re a level above and they got that “DAWG IN THEM!”. That’s my issue with this new Four Kings. We bestow these honors way too early, but it’s human nature so I get it. I thought Ryan would become like an Oscar Jr with Derrick James improving his stance, jab & adding some Errol\/Charlo to his game. A big problem with this era is low punch output\/not adjusting at the moment (IQ). Either these fighters are one hand\/one punch dominant or get the deer in headlights look & don’t know how to adjust mid-fight. Boxing is a substance sport. The P4P guys I mentioned above aren’t the most popular on social media or took a while for them to get recognition, but they’re the real deal. Meat & veggies vs junk food. Right now the torch to be carried is down to Boots, Tank, Keyshawn & Shakur. Shakur just has to find that offense\/defense balance. Teo is really solid, but something tells me he will struggle vs another technician or a steady workman ala Naseem\/Barerra. \u00a0Side note who are some people who’s boxing opinion you value. <\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: There a few people whose opinion I really respect in boxing. But I\u2019m sure I will forget a few. As far as people who are alive\u2026 I like to try to categorize this stuff. Because there are plenty of people who are sharp at observing boxing but they don\u2019t have the media platform\u2026 So, out of the people who have a platform, Max Kellerman is sharp. I don\u2019t know why he doesn\u2019t have a boxing platform. But Kellerman knows what he\u2019s talking about and what he\u2019s looking at.<\/p>\n
Roy Jones is also very good as well as Andre Ward. <\/p>\n
There is a guy named Dwyer that is really good. He does betting propositions on YouTube.<\/p>\n
Out of the new social media boxing people, Sean Zittell is very good. He\u2019s another guy you can tell knows what he\u2019s looking at. I\u2019m sure there are a few others but I can’t name them all off the top of my head.<\/p>\n
Hi Breadman. I pray God is blessing and continues to bless you and your family and the fans of your mailbag and their families. What do you think is worse, Breadman, a fighter losing by KO or him quitting? I think quitting is worse. Getting KO\u2019d\u00a0 means you just got caught by a good punch which can happen to anyone but to quit to me means that you have been broken and submitted. Quitting to me diminishes you more than being knocked out. I never heard who you thought won the Davis vs Roach fight result. Who do you think won and why? <\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: Quitting is worse than being KO\u2019d in my opinion. <\/p>\n
I still haven\u2019t seen an HD good version of Tank vs Roach. That\u2019s why I haven\u2019t come out with my official scorecard.<\/p>\n
Good day Bread. Hope all is well. Inoue is fantastic, but this just highlights further how great Pacquiao was. To be his size and reach the heights he did will never be duplicated. Plus he was more defensively responsible than Donaire. His wins vs Margarito and Thurman will always be the most impressive wins to me due to the size & timing of them. If Inoue fights at 126 it should be straight for the belts like Canelo did at 175. But a sustained run at 126 may not be in his best interest. You were right about Crawford-Canelo all along. Canelo has been fighting at the same rhythm & pace for years & no one challenges him on it except the obvious 3 greats he lost\/drew with. So long as Bud grows into the weight correctly & doesn’t get too sluggish he should win, based off of speed and activity\/scoring shots. I saw Haney training with Nate Campbell & was alarmed by his skinny legs; no calves or definition at all. Until he solidifies his base\/lower half this will continue to be a problem. Ryan Garcia\u2026 no comment. But just gonna say Teo, as gifted as he is, I’d like to see him put the punches together more & chill on the styling & drunken master stuff (Emmanuel Augustus). Anyways, thanks for your time.<\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: We will probably never see another Manny Pacquiao again. He started at 108lbs and made it up to 150lbs as an elite fighter. Sometimes everything can line up at the same time and that’s what we got in Pacquiao. The timing lined up for a special athlete to do something special.<\/p>\n
Inoue is also special. He just doesn\u2019t have the body type of Pacquiao. Pacquiao has a bigger head, legs and he\u2019s taller. Inoue is almost equally as great but his weight rise won\u2019t be the same and that\u2019s ok.<\/p>\n
I wasn\u2019t proven right about Bud vs Canelo yet. It hasn\u2019t happened yet. I don\u2019t want credit for something that hasn\u2019t happened yet. Canelo will show up better vs Bud than he did vs Scull. But I still like Bud to pull it out.<\/p>\n
Sup Breadman. How do you mentally prepare a fighter that’s a heavy underdog? In the ring I\u2019m sure it\u2019s a lot of game plan, exploit your opponents weaknesses, take away their best weapon etc, but psychologically, how do you prepare your fighter? I’d like to believe most fighters think they can win, but as a trainer do you acknowledge that they\u2019re an underdog? Do you train them as if they weren\u2019t outmatched or do you keep it real with them? Does this vary from fighter to fighter? In the Inoue\/Cardenas fight there was a clear talent gap but Cardenas fought his heart out and had some success. Just an observation\/example, no disrespect, but I had never heard of Cardenas and Inoue is who he is. How do you mentally prepare for that type of matchup? Thanks for the time. Hope you and yours are doing well.<\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: I like training fighters who are the underdog more so than I do fighters who are the favorites. A real fighter will get on his A game if he\u2019s the underdog. Fighters are human and although they say every fight is the same, they know every threat is not the same. Some threats are bigger than others. When a fighter is the big favorite, physically he may train hard, but mentally he may not be as engaged because he doesn\u2019t feel the threat level. When a fighter feels a threat, he trains harder for the most part. So honestly as far as getting the most of them in camp, I would rather train a big underdog. I keep it real with them and tell them everyone will expect them to lose but it doesn\u2019t matter what everyone thinks or expects.<\/p>\n
Cardenas fought his butt off. I love how he showed up and did everything he could to win the fight. That\u2019s how you take the challenge of a great fighter. Cardenas actually had more left to give at the time of the stoppage. But that\u2019s a story for another day. <\/p>\n
Sup Breadman. My question is about Tim Bradley. Did he overachieve in his career? Can you break down his style? He seemed very physically strong but lacked punching power, but didn\u2019t seem like an uber talented technician either? Curious as to your thoughts. <\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: Good question. I don\u2019t know if Tim overachieved but I will say he got \u201ceverything\u201d out of his ability which is all you can ask for. I think the boxing world gets lazy when we label a style. We use the term boxer\/puncher or slick way too much without context or detail. Tim Bradley\u2019s style is interesting. I saw him live when he unified against Devon Alexander in Michigan. I feel like Bradley was a hybrid, athletic, boxer\/fighter. Notice I said boxer\/fighter and not boxer\/puncher. Tim could be whatever he needed to be in the boxing ring except a big puncher but punching power is overrated if you had what Tim had. <\/p>\n
I saw him attack fighters like Alexander. I saw him box fighters like Juan Marquez. I saw him fight on the inside like he did vs Brandon Rios. I saw him box on the outside like he did vs Luis Abrego. He earned his HOF status. He was a terrific fighter. One of the best of his generation.<\/p>\n
Tim may not have been the most aesthetically pleasing in terms of his style. He didn\u2019t do one thing special but he did do many things very good. But he did have one thing that was special and that was his fighting spirit. The dude never stopped trying. Manny Pacquiao was a little more talented than Tim. He was a little faster. A better puncher. Just more dynamic. And regardless of who you thought won their first fight, Tim made Manny earn every second of success he had. You can\u2019t control what the judges will do, but you can control what you do. Tim never stopped trying. He gave himself a case for winning. Tim did that throughout his career. Tim\u2019s effort was next level. He seemed to be knocked out on his feet vs Ruslan Provodnikov but he was throwing punches the whole time. That type of fighting spirit got him in the HOF and it should be noted. That\u2019s a special quality that often gets overlooked when analyzing fighters.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s up Bread? How do you think \u201cMonster\u201d Inuoe stacks up against the following fighters at 122? 1. Erik Morales. 2. Marco Antonio Barrera. 3. Guillermo Rigondeaux. 4. Israel Vasquez (RIP). 5. Rafael Marquez. 6. Mark \u201cToo Sharp\u201d Johnson. Who do you think would be his most and least difficult style matchup out of that list? Peace, William in West Palm (W. Hollis Boxing) <\/p>\n
Bread\u2019s response: You know the Monster is real when he\u2019s compared to this group. Ok\u2026<\/p>\n
Monster vs Morales is a pick em fight in my opinion.<\/p>\n
Monster vs Barrera, give me Barrera on a close decision.<\/p>\n
Monster vs Rigondeaux, flip a coin. I can\u2019t call it. I can see them both KO\u2019ing each other.<\/p>\n
Monster vs Vasquez, Monster by late stoppage.<\/p>\n
Monster vs Rafael Maquez, Monster by stoppage.<\/p>\n
Monster vs Too Sharp wouldn\u2019t be at 122. Too Sharp wasn\u2019t a 122lber. Too Sharp was past his best at anything above 115lbs. Not a fair fight at 122lbs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"In this week\u2019s mailbag, trainer Stephen \u201cBreadman\u201d Edwards discusses Saul “Canelo” Alvarez, Muhammad Ali, Sonny Liston, Timothy Bradley,…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":90318,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4108],"tags":[1935,4851,27372,37745,7177,79,22178,16,15],"class_list":{"0":"post-90317","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-boxing","8":"tag-boxing","9":"tag-canelo-alvarez","10":"tag-manny-pacquiao","11":"tag-muhammad-ali","12":"tag-naoya-inoue","13":"tag-sports","14":"tag-terence-crawford","15":"tag-uk","16":"tag-united-kingdom"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/114484139277279511","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90317","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=90317"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90317\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/90318"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=90317"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=90317"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=90317"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}