The Errol Spence comeback and a response to Canelo being too slick for Oleksandr Usyk

The one and only Stephen ‘Breadman’ Edwards is back and this week he fields some criticism for daring to pick Terence Crawford over Canelo Alvarez, Errol Spence Jnr’s proposed bout with Sebastian Fundora is on the table and the seemingly eternal mystery that is Harry Greb is also up for discussion.

What’s up Bread? Happy New Year and I hope all is well with you and yours. Let’s get to it: If you were Terrence Crawford, would you focus more on bulking up or retaining speed? Personally, I would train like normal, minus the weight cut to make 147-154 and look to weigh in the low 160s to retain as much as possible. What approach would you take?

William in West Palm Beach 

Bread’s Response: Good question. First off I’m sure Team Crawford will make the correct decision in terms of his weight and what type of camp he needs. But you asked. So I will answer. 

I would work on retaining speed, dexterity, flexibility and reaction time. Those are Crawford’s advantages. And you can lose that if you bulk up too much. I would also have him cut down in weight to the mid 150’s then rehydrate up. Here is why. 

For the last 7 years Crawford has cut down to 147 then rehydrated up from there. So let’s say he usually gets in the ring about 162 or 163 – just a guess on the eyeball test. So let’s say that Crawford decides to not cut weight at all and just train and be comfortable. His rehydration will start at a higher point and it may slow him down. He needs his speed and agility. He just moved up to 154lbs. So while it may be easier to make 154 than 147, you also carry more bulk. So that will be a big decision for Team Crawford. I suppose they will research and go with whatever the best scientific recommendation is. But from my perspective, getting stronger, and being more explosive is one thing, but I don’t think Crawford needs to be bigger. I think being in the ring on fight night at about 165 to 167lbs is all he needs.

Hello Mr. Edwards, I am preparing a video report about Dariusz Michalczewski’s boxing career. As you probably know very well, Polish-born Michalczewski was a world champion in two weight classes (light heavyweight and cruiserweight), and most of his career took place in the 90s. He defeated fighters such as Virgill Hill, Montell Griffin, Graciano Rocchigiani. At one point, after the Hill unification fight, Michalczewski held the WBO, WBA, and IBF belts in the light heavyweight category in his collection, but he never fought P4P no. 1 superstar Roy Jones Jr. 

I already talked about this with both fighters. Jones says Michalczewski didn’t want to come to the USA and didn’t accept HBO’s offer. Michalczewski claims that his side offered a huge amount of money to Jones for coming to Hamburg, which Roy did not agree to. Maybe both are telling the truth, maybe someone is lying. I don’t know, I just want to tell the whole story from every side. 

At that time, Michalczewski was the king of Hamburg and a huge celebrity both in Germany and Poland. His fights regularly broke viewership records, filling the largest arenas in Germany and Poland. Sometimes young Klitschko brothers walked him to the ring as he was the greatest champion of their Universum Boxing group at the time. I’m sure you didn’t know that, but Mark Wahlberg came to Europe to shoot a music video for “No Mercy” single which became a hit record in Europe. Michalczewski starred in it and they became close friends. Wahlberg literally lived in Germany at Michalczewski’s house for a few months and they used to party hard together. I mention this just to show you how big of a star “Tiger” was in that part of the world, but at the same time he was completely unknown in USA.

Michalczewski won 25 world championship fights, but he never came to America, and for this reason, he seems to be overlooked by experts selecting fighters for the International Boxing Hall of Fame. I would like to know your opinion on this matter – does Dariusz Michalczewski deserve a place in the IBHoF? Is he being omitted because of his nationality? Is it because he never fought in America? Or maybe it’s solely because he never faced Roy Jones, who was automatically considered the No. 1 of that era by everyone? And finally – do you personally believe that Michalczewski ever goes into IBHoF? Would you vote for Tiger to get in or have you done so in the past?

I intend to ask few more American experts, but I’m starting with you, because I’ve been following you for years, always wait for the weekly Daily Bread Mailbag and often agree with your uncompromising views on boxing. I would be grateful for a response. I intend to translate it into Polish and include it in the report. After publishing the material, I will send you the link and tag you on platform X. As an interesting fact, I can tell you that somehow Dariusz Michalczewski is still very popular after retiring from boxing. He came back from Hamburg, Germany and settled in Gdańsk, Poland and achieved great success in business – his energy drink TIGER is available in every store, everyone here knows the name and face of the former champion. I guess he’s one of those few who were always good with money. Thank you in advance and Happy New Year! Best regards, Leszek Dudek Boxing Story

Bread’s Response: You know what. I’m going to say this. Darius Michalczewski made a mistake by not coming over to the US. Roy Jones was a more highly regarded fighter at the time. Michalczewski should have at least fought on HBO, so the world could see his talents and create a higher demand for the fight. Nevertheless I saw him in his prime and he was very good. I’m going to say that he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. He has the title defense numbers. He was undefeated for a large part of his career. And he performed very well vs common opponents of RJ. 

For a recent comparison, Michalczewski was just as good or probably better than Carl Froch. And Froch is in. I believe Froch deserved to be in…

Hey Bread, I have read you each week for many, many years now, and I just want to reach out and say, thanks, I read, I watch and I know, but I just don’t open my mouth unless… The comments that have come to your door are recently frankly, out of line. I wish you got to publish a letter each week (only if needed) that doesn’t need, deserve or require a response, just published in bold, under a heading with a full name and email address. I will also remember what I’m taught in life: “Do you believe the message or the messenger?” I choose to believe the message. I thank you, and can only imagine how difficult it can be, and I appreciate you each week.

I also believe you and support your pick with Canelo v Bud. Bud’s clutch gene is higher than Canelo’s; it’s just two different cars turning up on race day. That’s all it is, and Bud’s is meaner and has a better engine and handles better, etc. I might be wrong also, but that’s the way I see the fight. Bud’s IQ is too quick for this version of Canelo and will not engage with Canelo straight in the pocket, he’ll do it surgically. Speed kills and Bud’s got this – like he did to Errol in the first three rounds, let me see what ya got? Canelo for all his love, just doesn’t have the footwork to go with Bud, I could go on, but once again, let’s see if I’m wrong. It could also be something that is the reason he hasn’t taken the Benavidez fight, if something is showing in the gym and Reynoso is seeing something, Bud will find it. Anyway, let’s see what happens. I shake my head at people who ask your opinion, and then make accusations based straight off the knowledge they have been asked for… strange world.

Anyway, keep going, with respect and empathy always. Thanks,Nicholas (Sydney, Australia)

Bread’s Response: I get more racist and hateful emails than you could imagine, just because I picked Crawford to beat Canelo. Literal stalkers who try to bait me into posting their emails because they love to see their names on the internet. Straight losers, who claim they hate me and don’t value my opinion but read my mailbag every week. It’s the strangest obsession.

What’s funny is all Canelo has to do is take the fight and prove me wrong. His fans should be upset with him, not me. Canelo’s fans didn’t get upset with me when I picked him to beat Bivol and I was as wrong as two left shoes. It was one of the worst picks of my life, when I backed their guy to beat Bivol. It’s no shame in losing to Bivol, he proved himself to be a great fighter. But I also didn’t get one hateful email from any Russians claiming a conspiracy theory against them because I picked Canelo.

It’s boxing. We are making educated guesses. If people think I’m picking Crawford because he’s black, who cares? I don’t allow myself to get pressured into anything unless it’s for my children. I believe it’s a tough fight. I believe Canelo will be the favorite. But my guts tell me Bud wins by decision and, until something happens, I’m sticking with my pick. And if Crawford loses or struggles with another fighter in the future. I don’t want to hear that Crawford would not have beaten Canelo because he struggled/lost to someone that Canelo is better than. That’s not how that works. You can’t get credit for beating someone you didn’t beat. 

Hey bread, I appreciate the insight you give every week. I wanted to ask your opinion about the sport of boxing versus the business of boxing. I respect the integrity of a sport and how a goal may mean so much to someone. I respect that this drive can give someone a lot of motivation to accomplish great things. I think this is the sport of boxing.  A beautiful thing. From a business perspective, boxers have financial obligations to their families, their team (especially their coaches).  With that being said, Teddy Atlas said before that fighters leave a piece of themselves in the ring after a fight. 

This correlates with the time frame that a fighter has to make as much money as possible / to achieve as much as possible in the sport within that small window.  If both things don’t align, what would you recommend someone to do, choose the more financially rewarding route or choose the more legacy defining route? Much respect to you and, to clarify, I have the utmost respect for boxers no matter what route they choose. I can see both sides having perfectly valid points and I think understanding both sides is important for fans to become more informed before they make very harsh criticisms of boxers. Fans pay money for fights so they have a say but when a boxer’s career is over – I don’t know how many fans will be there for boxers who are financially disadvantaged. Informed fans = healthier sport.

Bread’s Response: I’ve always believed that you can make money and create a great legacy simultaneously. But the way you asked the question forces me to answer it, how you asked. And if the stars don’t align, I would pick the best financial route. There are more fighters who are millionaires than there are fighters who are in the Hall of Fame. It’s easier to become a millionaire in boxing than it is to make the Hall of Fame. So again, if legacy and money don’t align, I would pick the money fights to secure my future.

Hello Steven, Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao always get the nod as the best P4P guys in regards to the 2000s . Personally I believe Andre Ward should be handed that lofty position. I am basing this on Ward’s work. Ward beat more guys at their peak. Ward’s win over Kessler was a statement. The Froch win was even more impressive.  Andre lost two years due to injury and came back as if nothing had happened. I must admit that  I’m a Kovalev fanatic and I maybe biased here. But I would back Krusher over Beterbiev and Bivol . Ward’s win’s over Krusher help in my thinking that Ward surpasses Mayweather and Pacquiao. I know you rank both Mayweather and Pacquiao very highly . So I’m not expecting any love here! Your thoughts, Cheers, Steven

Bread’s Response: I love Andre Ward as a fighter. And I think highly of him as a person. But he didn’t surpass Mayweather or Pacquiao in the 2000s. He just doesn’t have the body of work or HOF names to overtake them for the top spot. Mayweather and Pacquiao just have too many titles, too many big wins, too many PPV blockbuster events, too many weight divisions and too many Hall of Famers on their resumes. However, I respect your opinion. Ward is an ATG and is definitely one of the best 10 best fighters since the turn of the century.

Hello Breadman, It was a great mailbag last weekend, a really interesting read. On what you said about Crawford I’m not even sure he’s a master adjuster as much as he may be in a category of his own. With somebody like Floyd for example he will adapt to anything in the ring but they are adjustments you could predict that he will make. Sort of like if there was a book of boxing knowledge those moves would be in there. Like when he started to walk Shane Mosley down behind a high guard. But with Crawford it seems like he will make unconventional adjustments nobody even conceives, until out of nowhere it’s ‘oh! he just clipped someone again’. 

I could swear I’ve seen Bud deliberately drop his shoulder and let people hit him a little bit to open up the kill shot on them. He’s a bit of a savant, I call him a jazz player, and like George Foreman said boxing is like jazz – the better it is the harder it is to understand. 

I got to thinking about Sam Langford and I was wondering if you think it’s easier or harder to fight in higher weight classes today compared to in the past. On the one hand I could see that advances in nutrition and sports science can benefit the ability to put functional weight and strength on nowadays. On the other, with day before weigh-ins and the guys at a given weight often being maxed or close to maxed out, you may be fighting bigger men in a given weight division now than in the past. My gut feeling is it was probably easier to jump from say lightweight to welterweight in the past. However, there was for example no junior middleweight division back then so in some respects it’s easier to be a two-weight world champion in more recent eras because of the additional weight classes that now exist. How do you see this and does or should it affect how we rate the weight-hopping champions of the past? It must surely be a lot harder to move up and fight the heavyweight champion today for example? Side note: I find boxing historians can be a little weird and some of this push for Harry Greb is a little bit like boxing hipster-ism. Much Respect

Bread’s Response: Crawford is like a savant. I don’t think he could personally teach anyone to adjust like him because it’s so instinctual. I don’t believe he has a system for everything. It’s more improvisational, than planned it seems. 

I think it’s easier to jump weight divisions in this era. More weight classes equal more opportunity. More titles, means more opportunities. Simple math.

Breadman, I saw that you’d said Errol Spence doesn’t like tune ups and also that he’s looking to go through with the Sebastian Fundora fight next. I’ve watched a little tape back of him here and there over the last week and personally I would be concerned about that matchup. When it was first floated my immediate reaction (without watching tape) was Fundora will knock him out. With you in the corner I would give Spence more chance but, honestly, I don’t like what I saw when I watched tape. It’s his defense. His defense isn’t good enough, he is in the habit of mostly just leaning back – which is always dangerous – and putting his hands up, not even necessarily that tight and tucked in, but with gaps there also. Specifically the Shawn Porter fight. I would worry going straight into a Fundora fight that it wouldn’t be enough time to work on in one camp and may even be counterproductive to try and do so as with the pressure that Fundora puts on it’s likely Errol would get caught between his old habits and what you’ve tried to impart. Errol is for sure a dog, he never stopped trying against Crawford, but when he is tired I’m not sure he uses his IQ – that he does have by the way – as much as he just bites down and tries to will his way through. You can do that in your weight division but it’s not necessarily going to work against bigger men. 

I have thought for a few years that he has actually gotten away from his boxing ability over time and a bit more monotone if you will in his approach. I’m certain you would do great things with him and help him max out whatever is left of his career, there is probably nobody better placed; you have literally brought fighters back and overachieved with guys who aren’t the flashy-style superstar talents. But even with you in the corner my honest assessment would be Fundora next is a straight shootout, maybe a six-round fight and who gets who first. Errol is still one of the biggest names and (can get back to) PPV draws in the sport but I don’t see the logic in them wanting to put him in with Fundora next unless I’m missing something. 

I know Fundora got clipped but he is heavy work with those long levers. As far as style, one thought I had when watching Errol is that his punches can be wide and slow, I would like to see him hold his feet a little more and shoot hard single shots, powerful cannon jab, powerful right hand, and sort of dictate/intimidate and break down guys more with his consistency that way. I guess a mix of Canelo and Andre Ward style? In fact Shakur is a better example when he sizes a guy up and shoots lead left hands to head and body systematically. These are just my humble thoughts – disregard them if you don’t agree. If it was me I would be concerned that the boxing media would blame and tarnish me if Errol gets knocked out. My impression is Errol is wise enough to be humble enough to take the lessons from boxing history and take a rust-shaking fight first if it’s suggested or explained to him by somebody he respects. That dog in him has taken him far but it’s also what might get him badly hurt eventually, it’s time for him to be a smart dog – a wolf?

Bread’s Response: I appreciate you brother. But I don’t live my life worrying about how much blame I will get if something doesn’t go right.

When Julian Williams lost to Jeison Rosario, he caught the flu approximately 3 weeks before the fight. He wanted to fight and I supported his decision. After the fight, I got all of the blame. From picking a puncher like Rosario in this first title defense, to having Julian fight the same style he did vs Hurd. 

Neither were true. The Hurd style thing especially stung because our game plan was to simply out-sharp Rosario. It didn’t matter if we were going forwards or backwards. Whereas we had specific distances and angles where we wanted to be at vs Hurd. We also wanted Julian to hit Rosario to the body with straight body shots, to bring his elbows in. Then get the KO with a hook to the body later in the fight. I saw something in how Rosario took body shots. After he fought Julian, Rosario was stopped for the count 3 times by body shots!!!

So after the fight it was said that I tried to make Julian fight the same style he fought against Hurd. And I shouldn’t have let Julian fight a puncher in his first title defense. No mention of his flu. And the gameplan criticism was an outright lie. I took all of it on the chin because I knew the truth. The criticism was so crazy, I didn’t train Julian for almost 2 years after that fight because all of what everyone else was saying affected our relationship. 

But I didn’t become gun shy as a trainer because I knew the real truth. The following year, I took another tough fight with Kyrone Davis on 5 weeks notice vs Anthony Dirrell. And we saw how that one turned out. I honestly feel I can overcome anything with my fighters if we are left alone. Outside opinions is what ruins teams. 

For the camp against Dirrell, me and Kyrone were alone for 5 weeks because of Covid and the bad weather. He fought is ass off. I never let the opinions of others affect my opinion of myself. I don’t have a choice in who Errol picks as his opponent. If I get the job it wouldn’t be as his manager, it would be as his trainer. And if Fundora is the opponent, Fundora is the opponent. My mindset is to compete and defeat. I’m not afraid of criticism. You can’t win a fight you don’t take. 

Compliments of the New Year to you and yours. Last week’s mailbag was a gem and I think I will read it a few more times. I agree with all your predictions in the first writer’s mystical match-ups even though the Canelo Alvarez v Terry Norris match-up, which you quite correctly like at 154, leaves me a little doubtful. In my opinion Terry Norris is one of the most violent fighters in history and Canelo is a little too laidback to live with that kind of frenetic violence, speed and power. Yes, Norris’ chin was a little suspect but while I agree with you that Canelo has an ATG chin, I can never quite understand when and where the myth arose that Canelo is unkayoable (not an English word, but you know what I mean). I saw him in a fight once where some guy who probably ended up being no more than an opponent seriously wobbled him and if that kid was any kind of a finisher, it was curtains for Canelo. Roberto Duran had an ATG chin but Thomas Hearns iced him. Norris had the power and speed to hit Canelo with a punch he wouldn’t see coming and was also reckless enough for Canelo to clip him. So, I like both by KO and, yes, it is easier for Norris to decision Canelo than the other way around. Which brings me to my point this week. I was surprised to learn from you that Norris is in the Hall of Fame. Don’t get me wrong, Norris does belong in the HOF because he was one helluva fighter. But I’m a little ambivalent given the “losses” that should have been on his record. Again, it’s not just about the potential losses, it’s the manner in which those losses should have come about that has me worried. I’ve thought long and hard whether, at the elite level (and Norris was elite), any fighter in history hit an opponent while he was down as much as Norris did. Yes, I think he was disqualified about twice but those DQ’s should have been more. In fact, Norris’ second DQ was so bad (he creeped behind the referee and knocked a guy cold while the referee was admonishing the guy in the corner). I’ve never seen anything like that before and it should be enough to keep him out of the HOF even though he belongs. I mean, he hit SRL while he was down, he hit Troy Waters while he was down and he hit other fighters while they were down but he was allowed to stay in the fight until he got the victory. It’s insane.

One final question on these bad things Norris did: Should we blame him or the referees? I honestly don’t know why referees who condone such blatant fouls should be allowed to work any more fights. You have written enough about the referee in JCC v Meldrick Taylor. Lastly, I read your analysis of the race favouritism thing in the context of your prediction for Terrence Crawford and Canelo Alvarez. I thought it made for fascinating reading and, once again, you were spot on. You know how I feel about Bud and how I said not only would he destroy Errol Spence Jnr but he would also burst the PBC bubble because Spence was the flagship. By the way, I think he also took Spence’s soul and I just don’t see how Spence comes back from that, but you’ve been known to restore the confidence of shattered boxers, so don’t be so dismissive of the other writer’s opinion. 

However, for how much I am a Bud man, the Madrimov fight came as a shock to me. My prediction of him and Canelo was almost the same as yours except that, at the back of my mind, I also envisioned Bud finding a way to stop Canelo. I once heard a fight commentator say he didn’t know what JCC’s facial skin was made of but one could make a helluva sofa out of it. Canelo is one of the few fighters today, if not the only one, who comes close to the old-timers in terms of number of fights. There’s no telling when something, say his skin, might suddenly crack against an elite puncher like Bud. I mean, I was horrified to see the bloodbath when Oscar De La Hoya bust JCC’s facial tissue wide open. But I’m no longer so sure. I am not disappointed Bud went the distance with Madrimov. Every KO streak comes to an end soon enough. However, I was shocked by Bud’s failure to hurt Madrimov even once. Granted the awkwardness of Madrimov was a factor but Bud is too consummate a puncher not to hit and hurt Madrimov at least once over the course of 12 rounds. 

There are two possibilities. Despite stories that Bud regularly KO’s heavyweights in sparring, he either hasn’t carried his power to 154 (which makes 168 a helluva stretch) or he’s slipping. I’m not sure which it is. I saw a troll say Fury ‘s size didn’t help him against Usyk. Well, Canelo is not Fury. Even though I believe Canelo barely makes it into the HOF proper (not today’s all welcome HOF), Canelo can cause Bud very serious problems if Bud doesn’t hit hard enough to discourage him. And the few times Bud has been hurt, he’s shown Hearns’ inability to clinch rather than Money May’s clinching or slippery skills. He instinctively fights back and that can be calamitous for the smaller man against Canelo. People draw too many parallels between Money May v Canelo and Bud v Canelo. That’s wrong. Canelo had not yet been caught with an illegal substance in his body in the Money May fight and while good, had not yet learned what works best for him. And Money May was, well, Money May. In short, I no longer like the Canelo-Bud fight. I’m sorry to have been so long but you will realize you haven’t chastised me for that for the longest time. Your thoughts? Keep punching Mr Edwards. Katlholo, Johannesburg, South Africa 

Bread’s Response: You haven’t wrote in, in a while. But condense your comments. They are too long but I will give you a pass this time. 

Any fighter that goes to sleep at night can be knocked out. Canelo can be knocked out, like any other human. It just hasn’t happened. He was rocked by Cotto’s brother when he was like 19 or 20 with a temple shot. It happens. But his chin is special. 

You know during Norris’s reign, I liked him but I wasn’t in love with him because of his victories over Meldrick Taylor and Ray Leonard. I hated the fact that he hit Leonard several times while down. A friend of mine who was a sports fan but not a boxing fan, said to me after one of Norris’s DQ losses that he fights like he has roid rage. 

I am in no way accusing Norris of anything, I’m just telling you what was said at that time. That comment always sat strong with me. Because Norris simply couldn’t control himself. He had a bizarre rage when he fought. They say Norris has a bad chin. But he was only KO’d 4 times in his 9 losses. But 3 of his losses were by DQ. I can’t think of another fighter who was DQ 3 times. That’s insane. And it still didn’t stop him from hitting fighters when they were down or had their backs turned. But I don’t think him being a dirty fighter should have kept him out of the HOF. Lots of dirty fighters are in the HOF. He has 3 losses on his record because he was punished for his infractions. Norris is the blame. We can’t blame refs for everything. He was DQ three times!

Listen, a fellow trainer, who I talk boxing with at least three times a week called me the other day and asked me if I was serious about Crawford beating Canelo. He wants Crawford to win but he compared the fight to Joe Frazier vs Bob Foster, with Canelo being Frazier and Crawford being Foster. I respect his opinion but I told him, I was very serious. I even told him how I thought Bud would win. 

All I can say is go with your guts. If you feel the Madrimov fight was too competitive then take Canelo. That fight doesn’t bother me because I suspect that Madrimov is underrated. I also know that Madrimov fights in a totally different rhythm than Canelo. So while we may think Canelo is better than Madrimov they present a different set of problems for Bud. Madrimov fought in a bounce rhythm and he didn’t open up first which is what Bud likes. Bud is a natural counter puncher. 

So the stylistic optics appeared like Bud was struggling. I do agree that Madrimov landed too many right hands. And Canelo has a nice right hand. So that is a reason for concern. But it’s not enough personally for me to pick against Bud. Fighters have those nights. There is always a comparison or example that will substantiate whatever you want to believe. For example, many people picked Tyson to beat Holyfield and they pointed out how Holyfield struggled with Bobby Czyz to affirm their beliefs. It didn’t work out like that. Boxing is a funny sport. So I’m at a point now where I want to see what happens. I don’t want to argue about a fight that hasn’t been made as of yet.

Hey Bread man, I just read the last mailbag about Crawford fighting Canelo. According to you Crawford wins because “I’m picking Crawford because of his attributes not his race. I think he’s too well conditioned, has too high of an IQ, too mean, too clutch and adjusts too well for Canelo.” Let me tell you, you are 100% picking Crawford and saying these things because you’re being biased and this blinds you from reality. Canelo is actually all wrong for Crawford. Crawford cannot fight on the front foot, he has slow feet, not great defensively, and doesn’t have the ring IQ to adjust when he faces another counter puncher/slick fighter, like Canelo. Canelo Is a MUCH better counter puncher, his ring IQ is levels above Crawford, Canelo can fight coming forward or backward, he can be slick and be a wrecking ball, adjusts based on the fighter, and knows how to beat you mentally.  

Crawford showed in the Madrimov fight, he couldn’t dominate a 10-0 guy with no elite level experience; Canelo is levels above Madrimov in terms of experience, intelligence. Breadman, sit this one out, Crawford has no chance at Canelo no matter what weight even if both were naturally the same weight.  Canelo vs Usyk would be a good fight though, Canelo has the ability to outbox and potentially beat Usyk based on his countering abilities. 

Sincerely,A true boxing fan

Bread’s Response: Let me tell you. You are 100% mad that I’m picking Crawford because you’re an A$$%^&. I bet you’re thinking to yourself, that I don’t know you well enough to call you an A$$%^&. Well now you see how it feels for you to call me bias just because I’m picking Crawford to win.

You think Canelo has the potential to beat Usyk right now. You sound dumber by the minute. But ok that’s your opinion. Maybe Canelo is your brother. But I think you’re just a dumb person who’s trying to sound smart. How about this… You guys are upset at me for saying I think Bud can beat Canelo. But instead of winning the fight in the ring you want to win the fight on paper and argue. 

All Canelo has to do is make the fight. He’s the A side. He can fight whoever he wants, whenever he wants. And don’t tell me he has nothing to gain and too much to lose. Because he had no issue fighting Jermell Charlo who jumped from 154 to 168. No issue fighting Josesito Lopez who was never a champion at any weight class and was a career 140 and 147. No issue fighting Amir Khan who was KO’d brutally who fought at 135 and 140 nnd never won a title at 147. Canelo gave him a shot at the MW lineal title. So miss me with the nothing-to-gain-everything-to-lose stuff. 

Canelo has a great IQ. And he has great eyes. He reportedly regularly beats up heavyweights in the gym. He knows that size is not everything. He also knows the trouble he had with Mayweather, Trout and Lara fighters who have similar body styles and traits of Bud Crawford. He can also see what Crawford is, even if you can’t. 

You guys can write in all you want. Call me all the names you want. Insult me all you want. I’m picking Terence “Bud” Crawford to beat Canelo Alvarez by close decision. No one is talking me off of my pick. Now go write Canelo some fan mail and tell him to make the fight, and you go bet your mortgage or rent on him if you think it’s so sweet. Send me your bet slip if they sign to fight. I want to see how confident you really are, Jackass!

Breadman, With Turki’s ongoing influence in boxing which fights are most under the radar you would like to see? Here are some of mine that I think would produce fireworks: 118 – Bam vs Nakatani; 126 – Inoue vs Espinoza; 135 – Muratalla vs Zepeda; 135 – Tank vs Andy Cruz (premature of Cruz, he’s a master boxer, can he outbox Tank for 12 rounds?); 140 – Duarte vs Pitbull; 140 – Russell vs Matias; 140 – Teo vs Rayo (leaked sparring session trash talk); 147 – Norman vs Benn; 147 – Norman vs Boots; 154 – Ortiz vs Madrimov; 154 – Bohachuk vs Murtazaliev; 160 – Kyrone Davis vs Lara; 168 – Mbilli vs McCumby; 168 – Plant vs Berlanga (great build up to fight); Cruiser – Jai vs Zurdo; Heavyweight – Usyk vs Bakole. A lot of these are far-fetched. Just thinking in terms of styles making fights. Some of them are true chess matches like Davis vs Lara. Others, like Bohachuk vs Murtazaliev could produce fireworks. And the cruiser and heavyweight fights would have big significance.

All the best,Richard K. Oregon 

Bread’s Response: I like your list, but let me revise.

Berlanga vs Mbilli @168 winner fights winner of Plant vs Munguia

Winner of Benavidez vs Morrell vs Winner of Beterbiev vs Bivol rematch

Opetai vs Usyk at wherever weight they decide to meet

Hello Breadman, I’m glad the myths that SRL ducked Pryor and SRR ducked Burley have been debunked. Whenever there is a push on social media a majority is created. Anyone who disagrees is subject to social media ridicule and embarrassment. After a hundred years Harry Greb is still being pushed. Just going off evidence and facts none of this makes any sense. It cannot be proven that he threw one punch in the ring . Three hundred fights and no film. None. Three hundred fights over thirteen years. That averages twenty three fights per year. In 1919 he fought forty five times and went 45-0. Think about this. It took Floyd Mayweather Jnr twenty years to get to 50-0. Greb basically did that in one year. Think hard about that. He fought away in Texas, Colorado and Canada. There was no air travel back then. A person cannot be in two places at once. He is supposed to have been a great swarmer. He could bust people up but could not knock people out. His knockout percentage is 16 percent. Ever see a swarmer who cannot punch? Ever see someone who cannot punch bust people up? Out of three hundred fights, 180 fights were Newspaper Decisions. These were no contests   that were not counted as win, lose or draw on a fighter’s record. None of these no decisions were fifteen rounds. They were all twelve rounds or less and no name fighters ever took a knockout loss. There is no film on Harry Greb . But another question begs to be answered. Tunney, Flowers, Loughran and Walker were all filmed. Why is there no film of any of them fighting Greb? Tunney fought him five times and Flowers three. I think they would want film of their fights. Fighting as often as he did, Greb must have made lots of money. But he just     kept on fighting. Getting a detached retina, just kept on going. You don’t fight three weeks after getting a detached retina, he sure did not fight Gene Tunney with one. After the Firpo fight Dempsey took off three years and married a movie star. It looks like money had no impact on Harry Greb. A look at the evidence and facts, it would take a very credulous person to accept this at face value. Thank You, J.B.

Bread’s Response: The Leonard ducking Pryor myth is so bad that it stinks. As is the Robinson vs Burley. Pryor was a career long lightweight and junior welterweight. He never moved to welterweight for a significant fight. He got offered the Leonard fight and turned it down. Took on Leonard’s old trainer in Dave Jacobs. Jacobs told him on national TV after Pryor defeated Lennox Blackmore to not mess with Ray. And to stick with fighting the little guys. But yet people think Leonard ducked him. It’s on YouTube by the way.

Burley was older than Robinson and he rose in weight higher. So when Robinson turned pro in 1940 he was a lightweight. Burley was already a middleweight and had turned pro in 1936, around 150lbs. So there was a decent sized size gap between the two. I don’t remember anyone saying Ike Williams ducked Ray Robinson for not moving up and fighting him in a non title fight. Similar size differences. 

So as Robinson rose to welterweight, Burley was still a full blown middleweight. Burley was no doubt denied a title shot. He may even have deserved one in the late 1930s at welterweight. But Robinson didn’t deny him the shot! Robinson didn’t get a title shot at welterweight until 1946, when he was 73-1-1. Burley was still waiting on his shot at middleweight. No one says Tony Zale ducked him. Or Rocky Graziano. Or Marcel Cerdan. Or Jake LaMotta. These were the middleweight champions of the 1940s. Robinson won the middleweight title in 1951!  So they say he never gave Burley shot. It’s true. But they forget one major detail. Burley retired in 1950!

Robinson could’ve surely fought him in a non title fight at some sort of catchweight in the mid to late 1940s. But that doesn’t constitute a duck. Whenever I see something pushed that’s a lie and it can be easily researched and debunked, I always look to see who benefits from the LIE. I think I know why these myths keep getting repeated…

The Greb phenomenon is also peculiar. I will take it at face value that his resume is exceptional and he’s an ATG. But what I won’t digest without questioning it, is how did he become the GOAT in (2010-25). When he wasn’t considered the GOAT from 1926-2010. There was admiration for him. He was highly regarded. But there wasn’t a big GOAT push. Then all of a sudden, some analytics expert who never saw him throw a punch, said he was the GOAT. 

I want my research experts to get to work. I want some commentary on Greb. I want some videos of his contemporaries talking about him. I want to see a video of Tiger Flowers, Gene Tunney and Mickey Walker talking about him. I want to see some people who were alive in the 1920s speak of him. Something. 

I know someone personally who saw Ray Robinson in his prime. My grandfather. He gave me the place, date and times of Robinson’s fights vs George “Sugar” Costner. Then when I got older, I was able to verify it on BoxRec. He told me Robinson didn’t like Costner using his nickname, so he KO’d him in one round. Low and behold that’s exactly what happened. I researched this personally.

I would like to talk to someone who can verify some things about Greb. My grandfather was born in 1931. So there are people much older than me in boxing. Greb’s last fight was in 1926. It’s possible for them to know people who were born in the early 1900s or last 1800s. 

It would make the case for him a little bit stronger. I can remember watching a show as a kid. I believe the show was produced in the late 70s or early 80s. I can say that because they named Duran the greatest lightweight ever and they talked about his twelve defenses of his lightweight title. Duran was done at lightweight in 1978.

So the three best fighters in each of the original weight division were picked. At middleweight the picks were Robinson, Monzon and Walker. The same Mickey Walker who Greb beat and is supposed to be better than. Again, it’s not so much of me questioning Greb’s greatness. It’s just that some of the pieces are not adding up for me. The devil is in the details.