Taylor Whips Lacy and a Delahoya/Hatton preview

When I wrote down my prediction for the Taylor/Lacy fight, I was stuck in euphoric recall of the pre-Calzaghe Lacy, whose opponents cowered before him. He seemed invincible in the same way we all regarded the pre-Douglas Mike Tyson. Like Tyson, once the aura of invincibility was shattered, all the flaws in his style showed through the cracks.

To be fair, Jeff Lacy is still a good boxer. He's just not a good enough boxer to compete with elite fighters. He gets blown out by a super-elite fighter like Joe Calzaghe. He is badly overmatched, but not demolished by a fighter like Jermaine Taylor. For his part, Taylor has been hit with a bad rap. He dethroned the (here's the HBO announcing crews' cue to fall all over themselves) "legendary" Bernard Hopkins, then outpointed him in the rematch (yes, he did Bernard...quiet down). Taylor got KO'd by Kelly Pavlik, sure...but only after he dropped Pavlik and nearly ended it early. If Pavlik hadn't shown that kind of resiliency, we'd still be talking about Taylor as a pound-for-pound nominee and his marginal performances fighting down to the likes of the undersized and apparently shot-early Ouma would be forgotten.

In other words, this was the matchup of overrated (yes, even after getting trounced by Welsh Joe...mostly because Joe is currently being legitimately fitted for Superman's cape) versus the underappreciated. Any realfightfan knew who would win. I'm ashamed to say that I played it safe in my prediction, calling it by decision for Taylor 116-111.

While I called three rounds of the twelve round fight close, the fight was never really close. At times, it was competitive, sure...but Taylor had clearly faster hands. Spending most of the fight backing up, Taylor potshotted, counterpunched, punched in combination and danced away. Lacy was game, coming forward practically the whole fight, but he was clearly the slower handed fighter. He lunged in, led with his face and was simply beat to the punch over and over. In this space, I've before bemoaned the type of fighter who, notwithstanding his determination, spends an entire fight repeating his mistakes, hoping for a different result. Lacy was and is that type of fighter. At times like that, I want to sneak into his corner and tell him, "try something...anything different!" Move to side to side, work the body exclusively, cut off the ring...anything...or at least anything different.

Alas, there was no solution for Jeff Lacy. Taylor had more tools, he was sharper, he had a better game plan and he is the superior focused boxer. If this was the crossroads fight for Lacy, he got run over by the Taylor train.

The only round I clearly gave Lacy was round 5 because it was a competitive round and because he knocked Taylor down. Now...the referee called in a slip, so I couldn't score it 10-8, but it sure looked like a knockdown to me. The replay showed it was a glancing blow, Taylor's footwork was obviously bad and he was off-balance, but that doesn't make it not a knockdown. Taylor said the ref saw (what the replay didn't show) Lacy unintentionally step on Taylor's foot, sending him off-balance...which seems plausible, except when you consider how both fighters behaved in the following minute or so of that round (and in the following two rounds). Lacy stalked, trying to finish the job and Taylor worked to escape and tie up. The fight also became competitive for the next two rounds as Lacy was clearly energized by the non-knockdown knockdown. I called rounds 6 and 7 for Taylor, but scored them both as close rounds (rounds which I felt could legitimately be called either way).

Otherwise, it was a blowout. By fight's end, my card, like one of the three official scorecards, read 119-109 for Taylor. The other two official scorecards had it 118-110 for Taylor. I hereby vow never to assess Jeff Lacy through the prism of the past...at least not against elite competition. But let's face it...we probably won't see him in against elite level competition anymore, except perhaps as a gatekeeper. He's a good fighter with a lot of heart and a good left hook that he doesn't throw much any more (a fact astutely pointed out by HBO's Larry Merchant, still the class of the crew). If he decides to stick around, he'll test good young fighters coming up and maybe great old fighters coming back down, but at the elite level...stick a fork in him...he's done.

Now...to Delahoya v. Pacquiao. This superfight brings a 135 lb champion ( yes...I'm giving Pacquiao that weight even though he's only fought there once and otherwise at 130 lb his whole career because he blew out titleholder David Diaz at that weight...and he's earned legitimacy there as result. He's not blown up at 135 lb...he's not!) in against arguably the best 154 lb figher of this generation. Delahoya will stand fully 4 inches taller than Pacquiao in the ring and will have a four inch reach advantage. Though the catchweight is 147 lb, we can expect Pacquiao to hover around 142 on fight night, even after the weigh in and Oscar will bulk up to 154 lb or higher with 30 hours to re-hydrate. If Pacquiao comes in heavier, his speed will be affected...so he won't.

Can a fighter of Pacquiao's caliber overcome a four inch reach disadvantage and give away over 15 pounds in the ring? Absolutely. Can he do it against one of the elite fighters of this era at that fighter's more natural weight. Of course not. I see this as a huge mistake for Pacquiao. Some say that he has nothing to lose and all that money to gain. In a way, that's true. But how much money is your legacy worth? I suspect that once the stars clear and he's staring up at those lights as he's counted out, he'll wonder whether it's all worth it.

I see Delahoya knocking Pacquiao out in the ninth. The same round that Delahoya himself succumbed to Bernard Hopkins when he took the same kind of fight. I'm looking forward to the fight, though. I love watching Oscar fight and I can't root against Pacquiao...so for that thrill alone, they can have my $59.95 or whatever it will be, but I don't see this fight as even particulary competitive after the first three rounds. Delahoya's heavy jab and heavier hands will start to wear Manny down and a big left hook will catch him coming in.

On to Hatton v. Malignaggi. Simple as this: Malignaggi is out of his depth. Hatton will take over this fight by stepping inside of Malignaggi's range. Hatton will then punish him, as Malignaggi struggles to find a way to get the fight back to range. Failing that, he will engage Hatton inside and take a miserable beating for it. I think we finally see our Hatton of old back in this fight, mostly because Paulie is psychologically taylor-made for Ricky. Paulie loves to showcase his handspeed, but it won't matter against Hatton because Hatton bobs and weaves to get inside, then roughs up his opponent. He is relentless and focused and there is method to his mayhem. If he weren't so darn likeable, I'd dislike his fighting style as dirty...and some do. But ask Kostya if it works. It certainly Kost him. He was aKosted, in fact. Malignaggi will get his payday, but at what Kost? That was too far, wasn't it?

Meanwhile, a fighter has to be supremely skilled to avoid making the fight that Ricky wants. Recall that only one fighter has done it so far. Is Malignaggi that skilled? No. The only other question then is whether Ricky Hatton still wants to fight, still has the stomach for it and still has enough shelf-life in him not to be shot? Probably, perhaps and surely enough for Malignaggi. This is Ricky's fight, but it goes the distance. I'll call this one 117-111 for Ricky. Paulie is a tough guy, but he's going to play right into Ricky's hands and I think we'll see that Ricky decides by about the 3rd round that he still enjoys big time fighting (last time out it took until about the 5th, as I recall). Ricky's not quite ready to hang it up and this fight will see his return to the closest we've seen yet to his pre-Mayweather form. It'll be a good fight, if not a particularly close one.

Light Heavys and Super Middles and Who Cares?

I've been away, but haven't stopped watching. Three fights caught my attention in the past month and a half:

Antonio Tarver v. Chad Dawson - my opinion of Dawson was suitably lowered after he lost convincingly to Glencoffe Johnson and walked away with the decision. Johnson stalked him, bullied and pounded him while he flailed ineffectively, attempting to keep him off. I guess that ineffective flailing was enough to be considered crafty counterpunching by judges determined to preserve the division's preeminent rising stars' undefeated record intact. Johnson the journeyman master doesn't get to prevail in the real life world of boxing. Those kind of decisions stand as proof positive of the difference between the way boxing should be and the way it is. Perhaps it is an apt metaphor for life, but if so it is a depressing one.

So...you can see that I was not too thrilled to watch Dawson again. I hoped that I might see the active-mouthed, if not particularly active-handed Tarver look the way he did against his last opponent. Last time out, Tarver got a walk-over against a tomato can beltholder from England who proved no better than a club fighter who led with his face. Tarver got to pick his spots, moved his hands more than he had in previous outings as a result and won easily. Against Dawson, I naively prayed for a Tarver renaissance where he once again threw caution to the wind and let his hands go. If that Tarver re-appeared, then he could dispatch this pretending contender. Alas, my prayers were in vain.

Tarver looked like the same Tarver we've had to endure since he supposedly exposed the aging Roy Jones, Jr.: tentative, looking and waiting for an opening that never comes and hoping for one big punch to change the tide of the fight while holding energy in reserve for the flurry that would be required to finish it. It's so frustrating to watch that fighter as he plods toward defeat. Indeed, we give up hope after a few fights that he will ever land that game-changing punch because he never does. He didn't land it in this fight either.

That isn't to say that Dawson didn't acquit himself well. He did. His hands were clearly faster, he counterpunched with both hands and kept the stalking, but ineffectual Tarver at bay throughout the fight. That said, his defense was poor and he was easy for the very occasionally agressive Tarver to hit. We only saw a fight in the 12th round, when Tarver started to let his hands go without fear of being hit. Tarver went down, but still won the round on my card. If only Tarver were less afraid of being hit, he'd be a much better championship level fighter. No risk, no reward in this hurt business and Tarver stopped taking risks when in deep long ago.

Kelly Pavlik v. Bernard Hopkins - here is a fight I'm glad I didn't buy. It didn't turn out as I would have called it, but it was still ugly. While that isn't really fair to Bernard Hopkins, who changed his fighting style and surprised Pavlik with his hand speed, it's still true for me. I knew this was a stupid fight for Pavlik to take and it turned out to be...just not for the reasons I anticipated.

Fighting over his weight, Pavlik looked one-dimensional against Hopkins. He stalked Hopkins but was overmatched by the angles Hopkins gave him. If I didn't dislike Hopkins so much, I would give him credit for remaking himself after the Calzaghe loss. I would laud his fast hands, his veteran poise, his defensive mastery. I'll leave that to the ever-fawning HBO crew, who can never get enough of lavishing praise on him. For me, Hopkins took advantage of a stupid promoting team in making this fight. Pavlik, who once said he'd fight godzilla if his promoter put him in front of him, took this no-win fight despite Hopkins clearly being the physically larger fighter.

I may be stretching to find the reason to dismiss this fight and if so, so be it...but we all know Hopkins put himself through superhuman torture for years to make the 160 lb. weight limit where Pavlik now rules. His self-discipline is legendary. So...now that he'd blown himself up to 175 to fight Tarver a few years ago, then never come back down, why would Pavlik agree to fight him 8 pounds north of Pavlik's ideal fighting weight? Why not make Hopkins sweat off that extra 8 pounds if you're stupid enough to take this fight? Who would be so stupid as to take this fight? If you win, Hopkins was too old. If you lose, your career takes a downturn and your zero goes away. Why take on the acclaimed defensive fighter of his generation at a weight of his choosing? Who would pay to tune in? I didn't.

When I watched it on replay, I knew the outcome and though I was surprised by it when I heard it...it's not quite so surprising in retrospect. Pavlik is at his limit at 160 lb right now. That is where his punch took him. In 5 years that may change as his musculature changes, but right now he is still a slim 160 lb.. It was no mistake seeing a slight roll on him at close to 168. He was not ready to take it up 8 pounds and certainly not against Bernard Hopkins.

Now...to Hopkins' credit, he did the job. First of all, he made the fight...which as it turns out was all the battle. He handpicked Pavlik and Pavlik's handlers are apparently too stupid to see the spider coming down the web. Credit to Enzo Calzaghe, who called this fight lopsidedly for Hopkins. The fight also puts Calzaghe's runaway win against Hopkins in perspective. Hopkins is hardly over the hill, as his otherworldly conditioning apparently is keeping him young. Perhaps I should also give Hopkins credit for coming out of his ugly one-punch and hug style to take the fight to the undersized one-note Pavlik. He moved away from Pavlik's power hand all night, but did step in to deliver punishment and never let Pavlik get his legs under him. I just hate giving credit to Bernard Hopkins. Let Max Kellerman fall all over himself. I'll take Joe Calzaghe.

Joe Calzaghe v. Roy Jones, Jr. - okay, so if you know boxing you'll ask me...why buy this fight, if you wouldn't buy Pavlik/Hopkins? the answer is severalfold: 1) I like these fighters and I don't like watching Bernard Hopkins, win or lose; 2) Joe is a volume punching fighter who showboats; 3) Roy is a showboat who can punch, when he can get away with it.

So how was it? A lot of fun...for a Joe Calzaghe fan. Listening to Max Kellerman fawn over Roy Jones, Jr. you can't help but wonder if he's got stock in Roy's promotional company. When Roy was in the fight (which he never really was, but if you listen to the HBO team, he won the first two rounds), you would have thought Roy had shaken off all the tarnish of his precipitous fall from the height of the sport. Excusing his three consecutive KO losses based on the weight loss after Ruiz, taking the follow-up fight too soon, and underestimating Glencoffe Johnson respectively, the HBO crew was ready to anoint Jones again. This, as they ignored Calzaghe piling up points and outquicking Jones even in the first two rounds. When Jones landed a lucky punch that stunned Calzaghe sending him down in the first, they immediately wrote Calzaghe off.

In fact, Kellerman proclaimed in the second round (that Calzaghe won on my scorecard and apparently on all three official scorecards too) that Jones was making Calzaghe "look like a washed up Trinidad." Not until the fourth round of Calzaghe clearly and repeatedly beating Jones to the punch without answer did the HBO team begin to change their tune, grudgingly conceding that Jones, who was barely able to fight back, was not getting the better of...well...any exchange. Apart from a brief renaissance in the sixth round (that wasn't enough to take the round on any card), Jones settled into a pattern of covering and getting beaten up. For his part, Calzaghe poured it on, relishing this opportunity to embarrass Jones in whose 168 lb shadow he'd built his career.

I'm not convinced that I must score a round in which a fighter is knocked down 10-8 for the fighter doing the knocking down. Of course, putting a fighter on the canvas ought factor significantly and a point must be awarded, but if that downed fighter otherwise clearly won the round, scoring the round 9-9 seems appropriate to me, as my 119-108 card suggested. I gave every round to Calzaghe, even the first where he was knocked down. Apparently, the official scorers disagreed. They gave every round to Calzaghe, except that first round (which they all awarded to Jones 10-8). The three ringside scorers agreed 118-109. I still like my scoring better, but at least the uniformity will tell the tale of this fight.

HBO's Kellerman shifted into Jones apologist mode about halfway through the fight, intoning that this "isn't the Jones of old." Even in the post-fight interviews, Kellerman pointed out that Jones was not the Jones of of his prime. I wonder if the revered Jones of old picked his fights and got to look great against a procession of middling opponents. I think Max ought to pause and recall that Jones "aged right before our eyes" at 35 years old. Here is Joe Calzaghe giving him a pounding, and while Jones is now 39 (or "nearly 40" as Kellerman rather toadyingly pointed out in the post-fight), Calzaghe is 36 years old. It is apparently good enough for Max that Jones once looked otherworldly against fighters that weren't (the otherwise alarmingly mediocre) Antonio Tarver. I'm sure that the truth is somewhere between my version and Max's.

Apparently, Max forgets that Jones ducked Tarver for years. Maybe there was a good reason for that. Jones can market himself, no doubt...with his jetting between minor league basketball games and prizefights, contract with Nike and rap career. He certainly built a brand, then rehabilitated it with a new series of handpicked fights. But when he tested himself, he failed. He is not to be blamed for that. He's made his money, had his day in the sun and certainly entertained us...but maybe he ought not be held up as the greatest fighter of his generation. Perhaps he was a very good fighter in a mediocre division. Certainly, he ought not now be held up now as a shadow of his former self. Perhaps he is now exactly what he always was. A fighter who, like most good fighters, is in deep against the best fighters around...and he just didn't put himself in with the best that often.

Let me close with comment on Jim Lampley's suggestion near the close of the fight that Joe Calzaghe perhaps would have been better off not showboating to embarrass Jones. Shame on you, Jim. How many fighters did Jones himself embarass that way? Even he clearly understood that if Calzaghe could get away with it, he should. That Jones was unable to prevent it, when Calzaghe was so clearly outclassing him, was the message Calzaghe had been wanting to send for so long: "I was in Wales for 12 years fighting undefeated but unrecognized before you were brought low. You wanted no part of me. Now you know why. While you were handpickng opponents and fighting in Vegas, I saw what you did to those lesser fighters and I'll do it to you now. Stop me if you can, but you can't now anymore than you could've then. I'm the best fighter of our generation. Don't let HBO tell you otherwise. If you hadn't been exposed before now, I'd have done it. I'll do it now. Hit me if you can, Roy. You can't can you?" He couldn't.