In this week’s mailbag, Stephen Edwards – one of the sport’s most-respected trainers – answers your questions about fights that could have been different over 12 rounds rather than 15, who he likes in the newly-announced Jake Paul-Julio Cesar Chavez Jnr fight and current goings on in the lightweight division.

Bread, It feels like a cliche, but count me among those who have you to thank for a bright spot every Saturday morning. We appreciate it. I was wondering how different boxing history might look if some of the classic 15-round fights were only scheduled for 12. An example is Leonard vs. Hearns, which you can argue would have been a win for Hearns if it were 12 rounds (I acknowledge that if it were set for 12 rounds, both guys would have fought differently). That said, who are the fighters who perhaps overachieved because 15 rounds revealed their strengths, and who are the fighters who underachieved because 15 rounds revealed their deficiencies? With gratitude, David in Miami

Bread’s Response: You know what, I appreciate the question but I don’t like to view things without context. In 1981, championship fights were fifteen rounds. No one knew about what would happen a few years later that fights would be changed to twelve rounds. Leonard hurt Hearns badly in the sixth and seventh rounds of their first fight. Maybe he wouldn’t have geared his attack the way he did if he knew he only had twelve rounds to get Hearns and not fifteen. We will never know, but I don’t like to say what would or would not have happened because that’s not the context they fought under. They prepared for a fifteen round fight, not a twelve round fight. 

And in fairness to Hearns, he’s not a guy who was stopped late in fights in his career. In fact his other two KO losses were third round stoppages. So for all sakes of argument, the fight went how it went, on that night. 

In regards to the fighters that overachieved because fifteen rounds revealed their strength… I wouldn’t say overachieved but I will name some fighters who were money from rounds thirteen through fifteen. And some who weren’t or some who I believe wouldn’t have done very well in the fifteen round era. 

Roberto Duran, Sugar Ray Leonard, Salvador Sanchez, Alexis Arguello and Carlos Monzon are fighters who were as good as it gets from rounds thirteen through fifteen. In fact without a clear statistic, just eyeball recollection, I feel like those guys won 80% of their championship rounds. All of them had late dramatic championship stoppages after the twelfth round. 

The fighters who I think had issues or would have had issues with fifteen round fights… Mike Tyson, Gerry Cooney and Jermain Taylor all come to mind as fighters who would’ve had or had issues with fifteen round fights.

 

Do you think Brian Norman Snr sees something in Jaron Ennis. He still seems willing to fight him. I heard you were present for their sparring sessions, could you shed some light on how the sparring went? I know sparring isn’t everything but it does indicate how a fight may go. 

Bread’s response: When you’re facing an opponent you can’t look at him in awe of, you have to look at him in flaw of. I have no doubt that Brian Norman Sr sees something in Jaron Ennis. I have no doubt he’s optimistic that his son can win. It’s just up to his Brian Norman Jr to exploit whatever his dad sees. 

I’m not going to speak on a sparring session publicly. Especially one that none of my fighters were involved in. It’s unethical and unprofessional so please don’t ask me that again.

 

What do you think of two big potential fights in the lightweight division? Shakur Stevenson vs William Zepeda seems almost done and Abdullah Mason vs Floyd Schofield. Schofield is asking for 2.5 million, do you think that’s realistic or a duck move. Who wins these barnburners?

Bread’s response: Volume fighters can usually do well with pure boxers. So in the rock, paper, scissors of styles, Zepeda can trouble Shakur. But I like Shakur to win this fight. I wouldn’t be surprised if Shakur stopped him although it’s most likely a decision win for Shakur. I just feel like Shakur is a level above Zepeda. I feel like Shakur punches better to the body than he does the head and a good body attack is needed to slow down a pressure fighter. And I think Zepeda has put so much into his performances I think he may have peaked out. I don’t know how much better Zepeda can get and with high energy fighters, their decline comes earlier. For a safe bet, take Shakur by UD. 

I don’t know what offers were made to the Schofields so they can ask for whatever they want. I respect Floyd Schofield Sr. for trying to get the most money he can for his son and himself. Boxing is a dirty game. And if Schofield Jr. starts losing or showing decline, he’s going to be thrown to the wolves for short money. So while he’s young with star potential they have to reach for the stars in terms of money. 

That being said, I don’t know if 2.5M is realistic for a prospect non-title fight. But who knows. Mason is with the Saudis now…. The worst thing that can happen is someone comes up with a counter offer. And they negotiate from there. 

I don’t think they will fight right now to be honest. Lots of times, pride and ego and social media starts this stuff, where fighters who are in the same weight class and at similar stages start going back and forth. The next thing you know, a proposed fight gets talked about too early. I think this is one of those fights. I believe that someone from one of their teams will put their pride to the side and move in another direction. But if somehow they do find the money and they fight next, I don’t know who will win that fight. It’s a really tough fight to call. 

Schofield has gone twelve rounds already, so that’s a big deal in this type of fight. But Schofield has also been cut and dropped and he struggled in that fight. Mason, on the other hand, was dropped twice and hurt. He seems to be a better puncher and boxer than Schofield but he also seems a little stiff and predictable in his attack. Schofield seems physically stronger and possibly a better athlete. It's a tough fight.

I have respect for both teams and both young fighters. Both look like they have future champion potential if moved right. But in all honesty, they both need more development. They both need more work. Development is not something you rush, it’s something you cultivate. Development is like growing a fruit. If you pick it off the vine too soon, it may taste pretty good, it may look pretty good. But it won’t look or taste as good as it would if you would have let it ripe all the way. That’s how I feel about Mason and Schofield. Both need a few more fights for the elite. 

 

Thank you Heavenly Father for our weekly Bread. Amen. Bread, you’ve been saying that Serrano just has to make a slight adjustment to KO Taylor and I agree. I won’t ask you what that adjustment is exactly because as you say the game is to be sold not to be told. I would ask if at least I’m on the right track. I believe she needs to make two small adjustments but the second one to me is the one. The glaring one to me is cutting off the ring. If she did that even a little bit better she would force Katie into more exchanges giving herself a better shot at landing the kill shot/shots. However, to me the one adjustment that would get her the KO would be to just switch her rhythm. She begins every combination with a jab or two followed by the straight left. If she, from time to time, just throws her lead left straight first followed by a right hook she’d catch Katie and KO her. Would love to hear your opinion. Even if it doesn’t make the mail bag.

Bread’s response: You’re not wrong but that’s not the adjustment I was talking about. And let me just say this, Amanda did excellent in both fights. I know plenty of people who think she won. I just see something that she does over and over again and it’s adjustable. It’s within her style. It’s not something unreasonable once I say what it is. I also want to say that a fight is not scripted. And it’s easy to be on the outside and say what someone should or should not do. Amanda is doing the best she can and maybe she doesn’t see or agree that she needs to adjust. Let’s see how it goes.

 

Jake Paul is a massive favorite in his fight against Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. I expect Paul to win by brutal knockout. It bothers me that Paul selects old, smaller fighters with name recognition to pick on. I openly root against him because of this. That being said, he’s following a formula every other promoter follows. Is it time for boxing fans to acknowledge that Paul isn’t doing anything wrong? Or is it fair to criticize him for being a “weight bully” who picks on older fighters?

Bread’s response: You have a right to your opinion. It’s subjective, it’s yours. So if you feel like how you stated, stand on it. It’s nothing wrong with that. Just don’t support the event. I expected Paul to fight Chavez Jr. And I expect him to beat Chavez Jr. up. Chavez Jr has been on the decline for a very long time. Paul is fresh, resourceful and naturally bigger. This will be a good name on his record, but this should be a clear win for Paul. This is boxing and the A side, who generates the money, can basically fight whoever they want to.

The fight I’m looking forward to is a rematch with Tommy Fury. That will let me know exactly where Paul is. Fury is not an elite championship level fighter. But he’s solid and he’s young. He beat Paul. Paul can fight just about whoever he wants. And I am interested in seeing if Paul wants to avenge his only career loss. It would let me know how much he has improved. And it would reveal his character and intent. 

 

Hi Breadman. I have a question about negative emotions in a fight. If there is hostility between boxers, is it possible to use it to your advantage? How would you guide your fighter who can’t stand his opponent? Thanks for sharing your knowledge Jakub

Bread’s response: Sure it can be used against the opponent if there is hatred before the fight. There is a saying about holding onto anger is like grabbing a hot coal and attempting to throw it at someone. It means you burn yourself. By being blinded with anger you don’t realize that the hot coal will burn your hand before you get to throw it at the person you’re mad at.  

A fighter has to know himself. He has to have EQ. IQ is important but this is about EQ. If you know that you make mistakes or become fatigued when you get angry, then it would be a good idea to not allow the opponent to get you angry. It’s one thing to be spiteful and intense but anger is different. 

I want to add that some fighters can fight angry because they’re so devastating offensively. Mike Tyson and Gerald McClellan were the best angry fighters I’ve seen. But neither were proven to be great late round fighters because anger subsides and there is an energy crash when you fight angry.

I’ve guided Caleb Plant. He has had major animosity with each of his opponents I have trained him for. He’s scored two brutal KOs against Anthony Dirrell and Trevor McCumby and he handled himself very well vs David Benavidez. It’s just something you have to remind the fighter of. Be focused, be intense but don’t be mad.

 

Hey Breadman, I’d like your thoughts concerning the sweet science of boxing versus boxing as sports entertainment. There are countless of what I consider brilliant but boring boxers who do not provide value for the money they demand or receive for the performances given in the ring. Floyd “Not Worth the Money” Mayweather leads the pack in this regard, more recently Devin Haney and Shakur Stevenson come to mind. Mayweather was an exceptional boxer/fighter, but rarely was he involved in a truly entertaining fight that lived up to the hype or expectations – no real memorable fights from an action perspective. Sure, Mayweather Jnr had plenty of heart, speed, reflexes, skills, stamina and a good chin. I respect his ability and accomplishments, but he wasn’t worth paying to watch after you’ve seen a couple of his bouts as they were all pretty much the same. Dull, with the exception of the Corrales bout and a handful of others. I can’t really think of a memorable fight he was involved in.

Floyd only seemed to do just enough to win his fights and not provide value for the hard-earned money fans parted with to watch his fights. Floyd Jnr was an exceptional boxer, but I reckon he was a better salesman than he was boxer by the way he convinced TV executives and promoters to pay him huge purses and the paying public to part with their hard-earned money. More recently entitled boxers such as Devin ‘Huggy Jab” Haney and Shakur Stevenson have been demanding big money for exceptionally boring styles of fighting. From the little I have seen of this pair you couldn’t pay me to watch them box. I must admit that when Garcia handed Haney his ass on a platter to him with a good beating, I used YouTube to watch the replay. I resent safety first fighters who run, hold and avoid engaging in proper combat.

I feel if you want to fight that way, stay in the amateurs and don’t demand to be paid money you aren’t worth from an entertainment perspective. I’ve argued with plenty of boxing purists over the years on this point and I believe the majority of paying fans want to see quality boxing and be entertained at the same time. I believe if you are partaking in a professional boxing match where you are being paid, you have an obligation to entertain the people who are funding your purse.

Ali worked it out, Tyson through Cus D’Amato worked it out and Hearns, Hagler and Duran through persistence, hard work and some brilliant performances forced the fans to pay attention, and these men ultimately received the purses their talents and performances deserved. I understand that boxers need to look after their health and their best interests and I’m certainly not suggesting all contests should be a Hagler-Hearns (3 rounds that had more excitement than Devin Haney and Shakur Stevenson’s careers combined to date) type of contest, but I choose not to pay to watch boring defensive fighters or even follow their careers. I suspect I am not alone. As usual, I look forward to your response. Down Under Daz

Bread’s response: I appreciate you writing in from Australia but I don’t like or agree with your comments at all. My first question to you is, who would you want your son to be taught to fight like? Floyd Mayweather or Arturo Gatti? You have to realize there is nothing cool about taking punishment. There are too many fighters who leave boxing with serious health issues. There are also fighters who decline faster than they normally would have if they had better defense. 

Everyone can not be a KO artist. So a smart fighter recognizes that and he fights according to his ability. I don’t criticize fighters for being defensive. I criticize fighters if they play it safe, knowing they’re losing and they still play it safe. But I’m not going to criticize a fighter for being defensive and he wins titles in three different weight divisions like Shakur. That’s ridiculous. 

You guys don’t play American football. So I will use a basketball analogy. That’s like criticizing a basketball team for playing defense and using clock management and scoring 90pts/game. Instead of running and gunning and scoring 120 pts/game. When the team that scores 90 wins the championship, and they hold the team that usually scores 120 points to only 85 when they play them. 

If you don’t like the way a fighter fights, don’t watch it. George Kambosos fought Devin Haney and trust me it wasn’t all defense that had Kambosos's head snapping back. It was Devin’s jab and right hand that Kambosos couldn’t figure out. And for the record, I don’t view Devin as an overly defensive fighter. I think he’s a solid boxer, with a great jab and good athleticism. But he’s not the defensive fighter that Shakur is. 

If Tim Tszyu had applied more defense and not been so reckless, he wouldn’t have been KOd so brutally by Bahkram. There is nothing wrong with being defensive as a fighter as long as you’re applying some offense. Shakur and Devin usually hit their opponents more than their opponents hit them. 

I’m going to share something with you. I once saw Devin in Vegas after the Linares fight. I told him to not let fans or media goad him into trying to be a puncher. I told him to box, be smart and win. After he outboxed Kambosos, he hit my inbox and asked me, did he box well and smart. I congratulated him and told him, yes.  

 

Hey Bread, long-time reader first time writing in. We all know that training camp can be exceptionally taxing on a fighter. To the point some fighters have said they felt close to death. That’s before the fight. But what is it like for a fighter after a fight? What do they go through? Thanks, MJB

Bread’s response: If a fighter wins, after the fight he’s usually sore but he feels good because he won. Those same bruises hurt worse after a loss so it depends on the outcome of the fight. 

I assume you’re talking about after a loss. It can be depressing. It can be a hard ride. It’s why I stress performance and effort over official outcome. If you fight a good fight and give it 100%, I tip my hat to a fighter, regardless of the outcome.



Dear Bread, hope you and yours are good. I’d love to hear your thoughts on Eubank Jr vs Conor Benn. Firstly, who you got and why? Secondly, what are your thoughts on the fight itself? It’s gonna be huge in the UK. Obviously no titles on the line but some things run deeper than belts – I guarantee both guys will care more about beating the other than winning any belt. Does personal grudge matter more than a title? Or does hardware trump all? Put another way, if the loser of Eubank-Benn ultimately wins a world title and the winner never does, who’ll be happier with their career? Very best to you sir, Max Williams

Bread’s response: I really don’t know who wins Eubank vs Benn. I can’t tell where either fighter is in their career. Eubank has seemed to decline and Benn hasn’t looked the same  since he tested positive for PEDs. Then there is the weight. Eubank is bigger but cutting down at 36 years old may affect his performance.

Benn seems more confident but that may be a personality thing. Benn’s father was fiery. Whereas the Eubanks are more ice. Ice doesn’t appear to be confident until it puts out the fire. This is a tough call for me…. I feel like Benn has a slight edge but I just can’t pick him to win..

 

Hi Breadman, First of all, I have to give you congratulations for your eye-clinic on Jaron Ennis. I watched the match between him and Stanionis and it was a display of skills, speed and stamina:  what a fighter. I have read your column for a while and read how some people accused you of giving props to Ennis only because he is from Philly, that Saturday Jaron showed they are wrong. I am curious about the resistance that some people have regarding a prospect or young champion, asking questions about their opponents. It is different when an athlete is from another discipline like baseball, basketball, football, etc. They want a young guy with a big resume like he was a champion for 5 or 6 years. I am a big fan of Ennis and I hope he can face another big name this year. Ernesto Baez, A Dominican in New York.

Bread’s response: Thank you. I’m glad you said stamina. Ennis is one of the best conditioned boxers in the game. I have seen him spar twelve, four minute rounds, with three serious world class sparring partners and get the better of every single round. But as time goes on, that will be proven too. People are so crazy to criticize for me saying a fighter as talented as Ennis is the real deal. If they weren’t trying to be contrarians they would see it too. 

I’ve never been that person to hate on talent. I loved Michael Jordan, Barry Sanders, Deion Sanders, Jerry Rice, Lebron James, Muhammad Ali, Ray Leonard, Roy Jones etc. I’m sure you get what I’m saying. Some people don’t like brilliance and they love the common man because they see more of themselves in the common man. Me, on the other hand, I just love talent. I can appreciate the workman, like a Mike McCallum and Marvin Hagler. And I can appreciate the freaks like Ray Leonard and Roy Jones and everything in between. Ennis is the goods and I'm standing on it.


Send Comments & questions to dabreadman25@hotmail.com