Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Kaplowitz Q&A Session #1

Ya got a question re: the topics of cigars, boxing, or horse racing, a la Shemp's last day? Send it to me for my answer via any contact method listed HERE. Thanks, gentlepersons.
"What's next for Keith Thurman?"

What's next for one Mr. Keith Thurman, after coming off a narrow yet unanimous decision victory over the very game and supremely one dimensional Mr. Shawn Porter? Not tiddly-winks, to be certain. To continue and as well to hasten the narrowing down approach -- I'll list some names and my thoughts on each a' them.

Mr. Floyd "Money" Mayweather: has admitted recently to a willingness to return -- if the money is right. It would only nigh be against Thurman right now. I can't help to think Mayweather (49-0-0&26) has a pan capable of frying bigger fish. This would not be a super-fight, and I doth think that's Mayweathers goal and only current bait. He ain't looking to make a name for hisself -- he's looking to cash in on said made name.

Mr. Errol Spence, jr.: Love the name. Sounds like some old Hollywood leading man. He ain't a leading man, yet, at least not in a blockbuster. Thurman (just about mainly mostly) is. Spence (20-0-0&17) is still doing community theater, albeit in a well respected troupe in either LA or NYC. He shall soon attain the heights of which Thurman currently enjoys, easily and then some -- but as of now, both being amid excelsioring at differing levels -- their career trajectories simply don't align.

Mr. Kell Brook: I've seen it printed that the IBF world welterweight champ Brook (36-0-0&25) has called out Thurman. Great idea for him to have did so, gentlepersons. If we learnt anything from the recent Thurman/Porter fisticuffs -- it's that Brook beats each of 'em (already having beat Porter, natch). Why/how were shown Thurman's chinks that night, and how they pertain here? Porter man-handled Thurman for much of their bout -- walking through fluffy Thurman jabbings and tossing him in turn, into ropes. Brook has that sorta strength, but too the punching power 'nuff to pay dividends therein.

Mr. Danny Garcia: A pick 'em fight with limited appeal? How can ya lose? It is worthy of note that Thurman began banging this drum months prior to his Porter match-up. Since then, his "Sign the contract, boy!" directed at Garcia (32-0-0&18) is fighting words if ever there is. Also two points... firstly re: limited appeal, Thurman has said that he wants to forgo PPVs and continue on with free TV pugilistic offerings. Limited appeal = lesser paydays as does free TV = lesser paydays. If he ain't 'bout moolah -- he's definitely showing my second point -- he's about belts. That's what Garcia has which Thurman wants, of the WBC varietal. I admire this, gentlepersons. The belts need more respect than the Benjamins, soitenly.

Mr. Shawn Porter: This is the fight that Thurman doth want; I simply ain't sure he knows it. This fight ends the same way it ended the first time, the next ninety-nine times they fisticuff. This time with a bigger check at the end. Will it occur: here's something, and a topic for another time which too may lend to if not beg, an answer: what the heck is next for Porter (26-2-1&16)? I say a Thurman re-match is the most he can hope for, a nice payday that'll buy him some cool threads, trinkets, and rainy-day moolah for the dawn of his gate-keeping career.
"How good is Exaggerator?"

On a wet track with a good set-up, this beta horse easily almost passes as an alpha. OK gentlepersons, that was rough. Lettuce say it was a weak Triple Crown field this year, and yes I include Nyquist, et al. The end result was a redistribution of wealth via talent that would make Bernie Sanders blush -- if not gahd-dang lift a finger to help around the kibbutz just once. It was the excitement of a lowered and even'd field, not the excitement which comes from watching anything particularly special. 

I will say that Exaggerator's up-side is upper than is Nyquist's. "At least ya have yer health." Although, Mr. Kent Desormeaux did suggest the horse dying under he at Belmont. "I was praying to G-d [ed.] that the reins were lying to me. The horse that was keen to progress was not underneath me. I nursed him to the quarter pole and set him down, put him down for a mad drive and said, 'Show me your stuff,' and there was nothing there. By the time we got to the eighth pole he was stepping on his tongue, and I said, 'That's enough. I'm not going to be fifth, I'm not going to be seventh. Let's get him home and probably get him back to where he enjoys a mile and a quarter or not three weeks in a row.'"
"How would Floyd Mayweather have done against the Fab 4?"

Mr. Floyd Mayweather (49-0-0&26) fits into the vaulted and nigh mythological pantheon of the 1980's Fabulous Four of Mr. Roberto Duran (103-16-0&70), Mr. Marvin Hagler (62-3-2&52), Mr. Thomas Hearns (61-5-1&48), and Mr. "Sugar" Ray Leonard (36-3-1&25) in the exact same manner as they themselves do/did. He has varying troubles with all but Sugar Ray. Sugar Ray ya see, most likely doth simply beat 'im. Lettuce put no cart before a horse and digress a moment. Then... 

Leonard out-Mayweathers Mayweather like he out-Duran'd Duran. Wide unanimous decision, here for Leonard. A boring fight for the casual fan. Lots want their monies back. "What'd ya expect?" I says to 'em.

As to Hitman Hearns, Leonard shows Money how to do that via blueprint. "That" being, in Mayweather's case -- earn a narrow and publicly contended split decision victory. Mayweather shines in his defensive skill-set display. Or runs. Depends on whom ya ask.

Moving onto Duran. Mr. Hands of Stone. This is the most entertaining of all these fo(u)r-instance prizefights. I give a 65/35 advantage to Roberto. Unless it's somehow fought at lightweight, where no one beats Duran mayhaps ever. But in Fab Four contexts, my moolah is mainly safe riding on Duran stubbornly finding a way a good few ticks more oft than not, and too on Money not having 'nuff Sugar to induce a No mas closing.

Hagler is the blow-out. Early to mid round KO for Marvelous Marvin. Mayweather has the rolls but not the feet nor snap of punch of Leonard, therefore little hope via lateral movings or power to keep Hagler honest.