LINDER'S LOOK AT THE MAIL
By Doveed Linder
I read your column on boxingtalk and had a quick comment on Saul "Canelo" Alvarez. I disagree that Canelo is actually Floyd Mayweather's new Manny Pacquiao. Canelo is a pretty darn good fighter, HOWEVER if we begin to exam his record let's look at who he really fought over his last 5 fights. Alfonso Gomez: yes the Alfonso who ranked third on "The Contender" reality show years ago, enough said. C+ fighter. Kermit Cintron" at one point I thought Cintron was going to make some noise, and he did, it just wasn't very loud. C+ fighter. Shane Mosley: Canelo fought Shane two years later than Mayweather. He was way past his prime, as you noted he looked past his prime on several occasions when Mayweather fought him. C+ fighter (at that time). Josesito Lopez: I like Josesito but he was only in the ring with Canelo because he beat Victor Ortiz. At that point Canelo had gone through a string of opponents as he was supposed to fight Paul Williams, then Ortiz and it just turned out to be Josesito Lopez. B- fighter. Austin Trout: his latest fight. Trout is a hard worker much like Timothy Bradley. In my book he's a B+ fighter. After looking at his record, please let me know who Canelo has really fought that has skills comparable to Mayweather. Also Pacman had way more fights with A+ fighters and was ready to take on Mayweather. I do agree and I believe that Mayweather would have won if they had met in the ring but it seemed like he ducked him. To wrap this up I don't believe Canleo is Mayweather's new Pacquiao-- I just think he's another hungry lion stalking his prey.
Linderís Response: I didnít mean to imply that Canelo now has the same momentum that Pacquiao had in 2009-10. I made the comparison because Canelo is now Mayweatherís biggest threat, which in my eyes, makes him the most obvious choice as his next opponent (at least from the publicís standpoint). As a fan, I need fights where both guys have a realistic opportunity to win in order for me to remain interested. I donít get excited when a fighter as good as Mayweather fights a Robert Guerrero type of guy. Iím not pointing the finger at Mayweather for this particular match-up, but in my opinion, Guerrero will give him a decent scrap at best. I wouldnít favor Canelo to beat Mayweather, but itís not out of the question. Right now, Mayweather-Canelo is the biggest fight in boxing. I agree that Caneloís accomplishments have been exaggerated, but he has done what he is supposed to do against the guys heís been facing. Thatís all you can ask. Just like Pacquiao, Canelo stands out as a legitimate test. The question I raised by writing the article is, will Mayweather face the best available competition this time around, or will he settle for the second best?
Doveed, I donít think you need to prove to the world that you are an excellent writer, deep down you know that. When you write your opinion about matters I respect that too, however, it does not mean there is any truth to it. Similarly Floyd Maywather doesnít have to prove to you that he is a great fighter by fighting Canelo, he did that way before the world heard about Canelo. I suppose you are entitled to blame Floyd for the Manny Pacquiao fight not materializing, but once again, itís your opinion. It doesnít mean itís the truth. I must say that you are very wrong for thinking that Floydís legacy will be remembered for ducking Manny, who will surely be remembered for kissing the floor thanks to a ďsmall lightweight championĒ that lost every round to Floyd Mayweather. Juan Manuel Marquez even made a wonderful comment I believe, when he said Floyd is the best boxer in the world ahead of Manny...once again thatís his opinion but the difference is...he fought both. I so wish Floyd fights Canelo this September, I would love to read your excuse when Canelo loses! Peace, Cape Town, South Africa
Linderís Response: You missed the point that I made last week. I donít question Floydís greatness, I question his willingness to face the best available opposition. If he fought Canelo, win or lose, I would give him a lot of credit. By the way, I think he beats Canelo. And if that happened, I certainly would not make any excuses on Caneloís behalf. You are right Ė when I say that Floyd sabotaged the Pacquiao fight, thatís just my opinion. Floyd does have a lot of fans who will hold him in high regard after his retirement. But most of the fans who I speak with are turned off by Floyd because of the results of the Pacquiao-Mayweather negotiations. Every time his name comes up, thatís what I usually hear. Why would you bring up Mannyís knockout loss to Marquez? You donít need to convince me that Floyd is a better fighter than Manny. I already know it. But Manny is a fighter who is close to my heart because he continued fighting the best once he got to the top. He wanted to prove his greatness while, in my opinion, Floyd has played it safe.
In reviewing my own response [which was printed in your recent mail bag] from a rationale view I would have to agree with you. I did not make an admirable attempt. In fact, I didn't realize until going over it again that the "lying" came off more personal than intended. So for that I offer my most sincere apology. I absolutely had no right nor reason for such a personal attack. Yet, let me explain. I do not take the subject of Floyd Mayweather personally myself. Nor does it make me "heated". Rather, I most often pull for the underdog. Whether in business, or health, or finance, or fighting, or Bball, or whatever......what irks me is one being judge by a different standard in life than another of comparable characteristics and situations. It is totally ridiculous that Floyd is berated for his fights and Pac fights the very same men and he's lauded. Judgement should be based on fact. The media has done nothing but bully this kid. It is like a mother who has two sons; one a good son and one a bad son. She treats the good son better than the bad though they both do the same things. She sacrifices for the good one and not the bad. She loves the good one and not the bad. She just likes the good son more. But they both are her sons and they both do the same dirt.
So, it's okay to like one more than another, but if it causes you to use a different set of rules and judgement from one to the other in practically the very same set of circumstances....then maybe the BAD SON is not the problem. Many media wrote that Floyd was too much of a coward to take on Martinez. But Pac was too small for Martinez. He was given a pass. I won't even get into all of the intangibles over the hypocrisy on that one. I do apologize for my previous post. I don't know you and should have reserved the tone within the realm of respectability. I know how to take correction.I wish the boxing media would do the same. I don't even argue that Floyd did or did not duck. The issue for me is the bias in judging the two. Pac and Floyd are the glorious sons of boxing and she, their mother. As (boxing media) being a part of the process of offering praise and corrrection to Boxing's sons and daughters, maybe using facts as a basis for opinion and unbiased judgment wouldn't be a bad thing.
With all the best,
Linderís Response: Thank you for the very kind and humble e-mail. I agree that the media has treated Floyd unfairly in some respects. And you are right that the underdog is often praised more than a fighter with the physical gifts of say a Floyd Mayweather or a Roy Jones. Yes, Pacquiao has been given more credit than Floyd for his accomplishments, probably because it was never expected of him. And I agree that itís not fair to criticize Floyd for not pursuing a fight with Sergio Martinez. Martinez doesnít even fit into the equation. On the subject of Floyd and Manny, both sides can get carried away with their arguments. Personally, I was really hoping to see Mayweather-Pacquiao. When it didnít happen, it was a real blow. Even if we put all the facts together, thereís no way to prove who was at fault, but I was left with the impression that Floyd didnít want it to happen. As a fan, I felt really disrespected. Whatever your stance is on this matter, you are entitled to it. Thanks again for the note.
Send questions and comments to: email@example.com