Robert O. (Los Angeles, CA): I think Saturday night’s fight between Vanes and Ouma was the first official robbery of 2010. Why do you think boxing is still the only sport that allows such huge injustices regularly?
Vivek W. (ESB): Personally, I’ve grown extremely tired of this type of thing happening in the sport of boxing. To the point where it makes me actually contemplate walking away from scribe duties, which I love. It’s both sad and humbling because it literally eats away at the opportunity for a person who sacrifices their life in the ring to feed their family. What’s even worst is that as a scribe, I try desperately to stay away from issues that ignite wildfires, but when you connect yourself as a scribe with various fan bases around the world, there’s simply no way to avoid the type of questions that open those dialogues like “why can’t a fighter from the continent of Africa seem to get a fair decision on U.S. soil”? Do I think nationality has anything to do with it? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Is it hard to articulate a point strong enough to contradict that perspective when the last few months saw Funeka, Mtagwa, and now Ouma get robbed, after a hand full of others? Absolutely. The thing here is that as a lover of the sport that’s a man of integrity as well, I don’t see color, race, nationality or any of that stuff. I simply see a sport that has one too many verdicts that can’t be justified, and there’s no governing body in place to stop the madness. Every time something like this happens the interest in a more valid governing body heightens, then by weeks end, dies out yet again.. If fight fans are truly concerned about this type of thing happening, people need to realize that there’s strength in numbers, team up, and hit the pavement with that vintage ‘No sleep til Brooklyn’ type mentality. As long as the passion dies down and no action is taken, we’ll see this time and time again. It does no good to talk about this AFTER it happens, anymore. If there’s ever going to be a change, the wheels of justice need to move in that direction now, to create that change BEFORE it happens again!
Emil S. (London, UK): The WBC is said to be considering super-heavyweight division. What are your thoughts on this consideration?
Vivek W. (ESB): This has been something that I’ve talked about for quite some time. I can remember making this argument closer to the Vitali-K/Chris Arreola fight, and being told that I was insane. (Smiles). At the time, I covered enough ground with my reasoning to benefit not only the huge disparity in weight – which regularly spans as much as 20 to 90lbs – but also the height factor. Many in disagreement with my thoughts felt that I was giving credence to some kind of ‘height’ based division, but although that wasn’t my true point, I would go on record to say that height plays a certain role as well. The most beloved boxer in the sport today (Manny Pacquiao) recently cited this very issue (height) as a deciding factor even more so than the weight and reach he would give up in deciding not to face a man his trainer said they’d surely “beat the hell out of” (Yuri Foreman). There are clearly great little men who have defeated a hand full of big men, but now days, fighters like the Klitschko’s are far more athletic and skilled than those in the past. For that very reason, many have began to also question how well these types of fighters would do against men who truly paralleled them in physical stature. This is no effort to take away from the greatness of the Klitschko’s or Valuev, but at the end of the day, Pacquiao’s reluctance to face Foreman, or perhaps even Mayweather’s reluctance to face Williams is a delicacy that heavyweights don’t have, yet probably should. All divisions fall under one umbrella – which is the official sport of boxing. If one division forces it’s competitors to face all sizes and weights in an unlimited scale, they either all should or they should all be paired similar in scale, to include the heavy, and – (what may soon become) – super-heavyweight division. May not make sense to some, but it’s fair, which is all that truly counts.
Marc L. (Orlando, FL): What do you make of the now official Hopkins/Jones rematch?
Vivek W. (ESB): This is easily the most noteworthy story of the new decade in boxing, but for all the wrong reasons. It pairs two legends, one of which is considered by the masses to be well past his time, in a showdown set to take place many years after it needed to. What’s even more difficult to comprehend is the bizarre twist of taking a fighter fresh off a KO loss in the very first round of his most recent match, who’s also been KO’d in 3 of his last 10 fights, losing 5 of them. I think this effort takes another dip down that lonely road which boxing apparently now occupies practically alone. A road that continues to show us poor decisions at the end of several fights….the road that continues to show us that it’s more about the big dollars as opposed to simply going with what makes the most sense….the road that continues to show us excuses why the best don’t always fight the best. You get my point. Personally, I’m a bit torn, in the sense that even though this fight is coming more than a decade after it was supposed to, I absolutely love the talent of these two men, and even though we certainly won’t get a “Fight of the Year” candidate in this one, the fact that I know it’s a swan-song affair for at least one – maybe both men – is enough for me to not only tune in, but actually attend the fight. After the final bell on the night of April 17th, one or both men involved will no longer walk back to the ring when they leave it. That’s a sad day, in my mind, because both have given me great memories and will go down as two of the greatest to ever lace a pair up. So, am I pumped about the fight? Maybe not as much as I would have been before. Will I watch it? I’ll be on the first plane smokin’ headed out west. Absolutely!
Craig U. (London, UK): Now that Amir Khan is officially signed with Goldenboy Promotions, what do you think the future holds for him?
Vivek W. (ESB): Recent weeks have shown us what it won’t consist of. We know that Maidana is officially off the radar. We know that Hatton is not gonna happen (right away – if at all). We know that Bradley has a very limited shot. The only names that appear to have staying power so far is Malignaggi and potentially Campbell. I think Khan has shown some amazing ability, but as I stated in this very same mailbag recently, someone as skilled as Malignaggi would be a catastrophic mistake for ANY matchmaker to consider at this point. Freddie Roach has spoken recently about building Khan’s name here in the U.S. before showcasing his talent on a grandscale. Well, I think Campbell and Malignaggi would both be spoilers if that were to happen. Khan has the speed and power advantages over both men, but Malignaggi can take a punch and is slick enough to outpoint him without question; while Campbell is a rugged fighter who can take a punch and subsequently take him deeper in the jr. welterweight waters than he’s probably able to tread at this stage in his still budding career. All indications lead to Malignaggi, so we’ll have to wait and stay posted. I just hope the powers-that-be know what they’re doing here, though. Freddie Roach was able to apply his magic touch to Khan and resuscitate him after defeat once. Another humbling defeat for this rising prospect and he could be headed down Hatton/Cotto’s-ville! I’d be very careful matching Khan up at this point while his marketability is still strong.
Javed I. (Miami, FL): What are your thoughts on the proposed Kelly Pavlik/Sergio Martinez fight being considered?
Vivek W. (ESB): I think this would be one helluva fight if it ever actually happens. I also think it would be a very telling moment, as it relates to the true worth of a post-Hopkins Kelly Pavlik. Questions have lingered for quite some time about him, particularly after the on/again – off/again negotiations with Paul Williams which was bares a story we still have no definitive answers for. Kelly Pavlik’s story has been a rather interesting one, and one that I’ve enjoyed watching for the most part. Some of the questions surrounding him I share, and a fight like this produces immediate answers. Martinez has very adequate power, a great work rate, he’s crafty and not just there to be hit, he’s awkward, and serving as the proverbial ‘cherry on top’, he’s a southpaw. Pavlik has a good beard so I think he avoids any type of KO trouble, but if Martinez finishes the fight on his feet, I actually think he stands a great chance of winning on points. I think it’s a hard fight to call because Pavlik is no pushover. I think we just simply don’t know which Pavlik will show up. The one that annihilated Taylor in the first fight, or the one that defeated a less than credible Espino, yet walked away with a ton of battle scars showing exactly how easy he can be to hit. If the fight is finalized, I think it’ll be a great one. Stay tuned.
(For the many that sent questions regarding the fallout between Mayweather/Pacquiao, it has been determined on behalf of both Vivek Wallace and Eastside Boxing that all opinions have been voiced, all parties have responded, and the time has come to simply move on from that issue unless new developments occur).
(Vivek Wallace can be reached at vivexemail@yahoo.com, 954-292-7346, YouTube (VIVEK1251), Twitter (VIVEK747), Facebook, and Myspace).