Hello RSR readers and welcome to my boxing mailbag. Before I get to responding to emails and talking about the big Oscar De La Hoya fight that happened over the weekend, I would like to comment on the mythical Kimbo Slice.
If you have never heard of Slice you are not missing much. He is a complete hype job. But in the world of professional fighting, the ability to sell tickets is far more important than a fighter?s actual ability. Kimbo Slice is a raw street fighter who, with the help of YouTube, became an internet sensation. He did a great job of getting his name to the masses and promoting himself as Mike Tyson reincarnate. Among the males aged 15-25 in the United States, Kimbo Slice is more recognizable than any active heavyweight boxer. Kimbo has graduated from beating up hobos then posting the video on the internet to fighting in professionally sanctioned bouts. A mixed martial arts company called EliteXC, the main competitor of the UFC, signed Kimbo to a promotional contract.
But Brian, what does this have to do with boxing?
Good question. EliteXC signed a deal with CBS television to bring Kimbo Slice and mixed martial arts to prime time network television this May 31st. Boxing has not been on prime time network TV in about a decade. MMA has never been on network television. Mixed martial arts is a rapidly growing sport whose fan base is very strong among young American males. Network television has now jumped on the newest trend, the MMA bandwagon. The return of combat sports to network television is a huge deal.
Right now this fight card to be shown on Saturday night, May 31st is an experiment. CBS needs Kimbo?s EliteXC show to bring in at least a 2.5 ratings share or else they will stop showing MMA. Kimbo Slice is a recognizable name with cross over appeal. I expect this fight card, as long as it is advertised properly, will garner far better ratings than a 2.5.
Again Brian, what does this have to do with boxing?
Sorry, I?ll get to the point. So if the partnership between EliteXC and CBS becomes successful and MMA becomes a hit on network television, all of the other networks will want a piece of the action. The major networks are all sheep that try to follow the latest hit trend. Just look at the number of reality shows that popped up after Survivor became number one in the ratings. If MMA continues to garner big ratings, the networks executives will be in a frenzy to feature big time fights.
That is where boxing comes in. MMA fans would have you believe that this spot on prime time CBS is proof that boxing is dead and will eventually be completely overtaken by MMA. I have a different take that is much more optimistic for boxing fans.
Boxing is a different sport than MMA with a history too rich to simply be discarded. These are trying times but boxing still generates impressive PPV numbers proving that there are still millions of boxing fans in the world. But boxing, although different than MMA, is similar enough to be considered a viable alternative. Boxing and MMA do not have the same fan base, however, the audience between boxing and MMA overlap more than the fans of MMA and say, baseball or basketball. Once the network execs realize this and see the huge potential that boxing has, boxing has an ?in?. I am not talking about minor fights like the kind that Main Events showed on NBC in 2003. I am talking about huge fights that would normally be available only on PPV. Imagine what the ratings would have been for Floyd Mayweather vs. Oscar De La Hoya.
Kimbo Slice, the ridiculous but very scary-looking street fighter, has planted a seed, a seed that could eventually bloom and open the door to the return of boxing to network television. Could the next golden age of boxing be on the horizon? Let?s hope so.
Moving on to actual boxing news, Oscar De La Hoya returned to regular HBO winning a near shut out decision over ?The Contender? alumnus Steve Forbes. I forgot to preview this fight in my mailbag last week, which tells you how excited I was to see Forbes vs. De La Hoya. The result was as I expected. De La Hoya was better but Forbes, a durable veteran who had never been previously stopped, stood in until the end and put up a good effort. Forbes was a bad choice of opponent for De La Hoya if he wanted to make a statement. Forbes is hard to look good against and nearly impossible to knockout.
The only people who Oscar seemed to impress on Saturday were the HBO commentators.
De La Hoya announced at the post fight press conference that he wants to fight Floyd Mayweather in a rematch. The rematch to the best selling boxing match in history is tentatively set for September although no official announcement has been made. You wonder if Floyd has even stepped in the gym since his appearance in WWE?s Wrestlemania.
A fan commenting on Oscar De La Hoya?s performance against Forbes starts off the questions for this week. I hope you enjoy and please send in your questions so I can feature them in next week?s mailbag. I always love hearing from RSR readers.
De La Hoya/Mayweather Rematch A Scam
Hi Brian, it?s kinda hard to see De La Hoya winning the fight against Moneyweather if he can?t even totally dominate Forbes. He got tagged a lot with Forbes? sudden burst of quickness and Oscar will have to be crazy not to expect Moneyweather to do the same. Moneyweather is on another level compared to Forbes. I guess there is no argument there, that the Moneyweather vs. De La Hoya rematch is just another scam to fatten up both fighter?s pockets. I never thought Oscar De La Hoya would stoop down to being this kind of a fighter, Moneyweather we can expect, but Oscar…
-Reggio
Reggio,
I totally agree. There were a lot of disappointed Oscar fans on Saturday night even though he won just about every minute of every round against Steve Forbes. De La Hoya is in serious denial about his current ability as a boxer if he thinks he can beat Mayweather in a rematch. This will go down as one of the most unnecessary rematches in the history of boxing. There is no motive, purpose, rhyme or reason for Mayweather vs. De La Hoya II to happen except for the participants to make enormous amounts of money. I seriously doubt that the rematch will match the overwhelming success of the first fight but there is still plenty of money to be made for all parties involved.
The only hope I have for the rematch comes from something that Mayweather said after his fight with Ricky Hatton. He acknowledged that he had made for boring fights recently and tried to be more exciting against Hatton. So hopefully that means that Mayweather will take more chances in the rematch with De La Hoya, which will make for a more aesthetically pleasing battle than the first fight. De La Hoya’s motivation for revenge and Mayweather trying to please the fans could mix together to create an entertaining match.
On Kermit Cintron
Hi Brian, what can you say about Kermit Cintron? In my opinion, he has good enough skill to beat anyone out there, including Antonio Margarito, but what I saw in him is a lack of courage, confidence and braveness in his heart. I think that is one of the reasons why he lost. What do you think?
-Flash
Flash,
Kermit is a very good fighter and the reason that he lost to Margarito was not due to a lack of courage or braveness. Quite the contrary, Cintron was brave enough to step in the ring against a very dangerous opponent. Kermit could have easily avoided Margarito just like 90% of the rest of the welterweight division but he chose to fight him.
Another way in which I vehemently disagree with your theory is the way that Kermit fought the rematch. Cintron may have lost that fight because he had too much courage and bravery. I mean, they guy tried to slug it out and knock out Margarito, a guy who had already KO?d him. That kind of bravery borders on foolishness. A less courageous approach of jabbing, boxing, and moving would have served Kermit better. There is no question that he fought bravely in the rematch, he was simply out gunned and in a styles match up that favored Antonio Margarito by a wide margin.
Styles make fights, especially in the welterweight division right now. For example, I think that Floyd Mayweather would smoke Cintron similar to the way he did with Diego Corrales. I think that Margarito has a great style to potentially upset Floyd Mayweather. However, I think that Cintron has a better shot at beating Miguel Cotto than Margarito does.
Coach Freddie and Others
Good day and God Bless. I will go straight to my question. Some people are saying that Pacman should change his coach or trainer because they said that Coach Freddie Roach has nothing more to offer. But I think that those comments are not fair. Freddie Roach is sincere and a dedicated coach and trainer. He treats Pacman like his own son and he transformed into a better fighter because of him. They have good chemistry.
I believe that Pacman should stay with Coach Freddie. What do you think? Will changing a coach makes Pacman a better fighter?
I think Bernard Hopkins should really retire now and enjoy life since he was a great fighter and should have a graceful exit. For Joe Calzaghe, if there is no choice, a fight with Roy Jones might be ok rather than nothing. Thanks and more power.
-Jason Calara
Jason,
Freddie Roach is one of the premier trainers in boxing. He has not failed Pacquiao yet and always comes up with offensive minded game plans that work well with Pacquiao. Leaving Roach would be a mistake in my opinion. Roach is the person who first allowed Pacquiao to meet his potential, transforming him into a focused destroyer. Sometimes a boxer has learned everything that he can from a trainer and plateaus, but I have not seen that happen with Roach. Plus, Roach is very good at coming up with specific game plans to counter act opponents from fight to fight, which is an invaluable asset. Even if Pacquiao is not improving at a rate that he used to when he was first with Roach, I can’t imagine that another trainer would be able to do a better job.
I agree with you about Calzaghe vs. Jones. Jones is not an ideal opponent since he is far past his prime but there are not really any better options out there at the moment. Jones is better than nothing, meaning a fight with Roy would be more appealing than fighting the no hopers that Calzaghe used to fight.
Outrageous Tomfoolery
Lennox Lewis called. He wants his small package back. California huh? You red hot chili pecker, you. I like them. They sing good tunes that you can listen to while you have a bowel movement.
Brian Minto is chubby but is he any good? I saw he KO’d somebody in round one but the guy looked like he was slow or something. Who is Minto fighting? Bring me Frans Botha. Is he coming back?
-Wilbur Dilbur Brian Shortinthepants
Wilbur,
For those who are just tuning in, this emailer has terrorized my inbox for the past three weeks in a row. He claims that his name is Wilbur Brian (my name backwards) and makes comments that are rather rude and crude. Allowing this individual space in my column, even though he writes phrases like ?bowel movement,? is proof that I do not discriminate against my readers. If you take the time to write me an email I will feature you in my mailbag.
But as for Mr. Dilbur Brian?s boxing related question, I wouldn?t say that Brian Minto is necessarily good, but he is not bad. You could probably even call Minto a contender in today?s pathetic excuse for a heavyweight division. Brian Minto lost a unanimous decision to Luan Krasniqi last March in really the only fight that he had ever stepped up against world class opposition. Since then he has won three straight fights by 1st round knockouts, most recently he TKO?d Chad Van Sickle (the fighter who you said ?looked like he was slow or something?). So to answer your question of who Minto is fighting, he is fighting second rate fighters and should probably stick to doing that if he wants to keep winning.
Frans Botha? Dude, are you serious? You must have an obsession with mediocre heavyweights. Botha will probably fight again but if he wasn?t very good in his prime I guarantee you that Botha will not very good when he is 40 years old.
Manny Pacquiao vs. Salvador Sanchez
Brian,
I am a Filipino boxing fan, but one of my favorite boxers of all time is Mexican legend, Salvador Sanchez. Wishful thinking: If, lets say, Pacquiao and Sanchez were able to fight, who do you think would win? It could be one hell of a fight. I like your column Brian! All the best!!
-Francis
Francis,
Salvador Sanchez surely was an all time great fighter. You can only wonder how great Sanchez? career would have been if his life was not tragically cut short at the age of 23. He could do anything in the ring whether that be boxing, slugging, slipping, jabbing, etc. Sanchez put together hall of fame credentials but was so young that he might not have even been in his prime yet!
Sanchez was a more complete fighter than Manny Pacquiao is right now, although Pacquiao is a very dynamic offensive fighter with dynamite in his fists. Pacquiao would make this fight interesting and put up a game effort being able to withstand great punishment due to his chin and courageous heart. Sanchez would use his better boxing skills and ring intelligence to win a unanimous decision over Pacquiao in an epic battle that would have fans from all over the world clamoring for more.
A Prime Hopkins Still Loses To Calzaghe
Dear Brian, I have been reading your mailbag for several months and I can say that it’s very informative and fun to read.
I have read a lot of comments regarding the Calzaghe and Hopkins fight, and most observers, including you, believe that had these fighters faced each other years ago, then Hopkins would’ve won. I beg to disagree.
Surely, a younger Hopkins would be more competitive against Calzaghe, but we also have to remember that the reason why Calzaghe wasn’t able to execute his game plan was that Hopkins clinched too much. We all know that Hopkins had to depend on those dirty tactics because he knew that he is already old and has less stamina to last 12 rounds. A younger Hopkins would be more confident to brawl and thus allow Joe to showcase his skills in a more consistent manner. Many people criticize Calzaghe for being a slapping volume puncher, but so is Hopkins (well, his punches are not “slaps,” but he is no knockout artist nonetheless).
What do you think about my opinion, Brian? Thank you very much and more power to your mailbag!
-Chris
Chris,
Calzaghe may have been able to beat Hopkins if both were in their primes. Such a victory would not be a huge upset, but it would have been an upset in my eyes nonetheless.
Hopkins landed the cleaner, harder, and more precise punches in his fight with Joe. The reason Hopkins lost is that he did not throw enough punches. I blame his advanced age as the reason that he could not throw enough punches to keep up with Calzaghe. Bernard in his prime could hold his own with volume punchers in terms of keeping his aggression at the right pace.
Hopkins frequently clinched against Calzaghe because he could not maintain the pace. Holding was his way to conserve energy since he was unable to run around or fend Joe off with punches. Please note that Bernard had incredible stamina in his prime.
Even the old version of Hopkins got the overall better of the exchanges against Calzaghe. He won the first few rounds handily but then started to lose his lead as the rounds went on and he had to rely more and more on his 43 year old legs. When they were in the center of the ring, boxing instead of clinching, Hopkins was winning the fight. A prime Hopkins would have clinched a bit here and there, but not nearly as much as he did against Joe as an old man because he would not have needed to.
Bottom line is that Hopkins lost because he could not match Calzaghe’s stamina, but if he were younger the edge in stamina would have clearly been Calzaghe’s. That is why Bernard would be the favorite against Calzaghe in his prime. It would have been a very hotly contested bout.
My Pound For Pound List
Hi Brian, I would like to commend you on your mailbag. It’s worth reading it because of its impartiality and cleverness.
Can you please post your latest top ten pound-4-pound list? I read an article of another boxing scribe (not in RSR) about his personal top ten pound-4-pound list. Many Pacmaniacs disagreed and reacted to it because he put Joe Calzaghe (#2) above Manny Pacquiao (#3). Do you agree with that? Before the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight, he put Manny Pacquiao at #2, Juan Manuel Marquez at #3, Miguel Cotto at #4, Joe Calzaghe at #5 and Hopkins at #6. I think it’s not logical to put Calzaghe above Pacquiao because Pacman (#2) beat JMM (#3) and Calzaghe (#5) beat only #6 (aging Hopkins). What’s your take on this Brian?
Thanks,
-Nujlaola
Nujlaola,
You are right about his decision to put Calzaghe above Pacquiao not making sense based on his rankings before the fight. Now if he had rated Bernard Hopkins at #3 instead of Marquez then I could understand his rationale.
This is what my pound for pound list looks like at the moment:
1- Floyd Mayweather 2- Manny Pacquiao 3- Joe Calzaghe 4- Israel Vazquez 5- Juan Manuel Marquez 6- Miguel Cotto 7- Ricky Hatton 8- Rafael Marquez 9- Kelly Pavlik 10- Bernard Hopkins
Honorable Mention: Ivan Calderon, David Haye, Nate Campbell, Joel Casamayor, Antonio Margarito, Joan Guzman.
My decision to rate Pacquiao above Calzaghe is based mostly on quality of opposition. Juan Manuel Marquez was a better pound for pound fighter at the time he fought Pacquiao than Hopkins was at the time he fought Calzaghe. You cannot ignore the age of Hopkins and the fact that Calzaghe still struggled with him despite Hopkins being extremely old for a prizefighter. Plus, Manny consistently fights the higher level of opposition with legend after legend listed on his fight record.
Don?t agree with my P4P list? If you do or if you have another boxing question or comment, send me an email and I will happily respond to all inquiries. Till next time, take care every one!
