Theory 1:  Delayed

Ok so Fed went down in the final to an upstart kid we all had our eye on.  Del Potro was on a mission.  After all, he beat down Nadal in the semis, even if it was Nadal at about 60%, and nobody has ever beaten Fed and Nadal in a single slam.  We can liken this Open to Kuerten winning the French a couple times in the midst of Sampras' glory.  Fed won two slams this year, and as Pete himself used to say, 'a good year is when I win one slam, a great year is when I win two'.  Even by Fed's closest historical competition, this was a great year for Fed.  He's never been seriously injured, he is in the heart of his prime slam winning years, and the stability in his family will propel him to several more slams in the next 3 years.  Also, his ballerina movement allows him to play brutal matches without significant strain on the body.  Players only beat Fed when they're in the 'tree' and he's playing less than Federesque tennis, and even then it's no sure win.  Look for Fed to win another couple of Slams in '09. 

Theory 2:  Derailed

We saw a true changing of the guard Monday.  It reminded me of watching Safin absolutely blast Pistol Pete from the Open final court near the end of Pete's reign.  Once Del Potro found his groove, we saw the chinks in Fed's armor: he's capable of being blasted off the court.(see generally, Safin v. Fed when Safin's not high)  His game can look anemic at times, he's slowing down a step or two, and he's struggling to 'get up' on his serve.  And, Del Potro didn't turn on the jets until mid-way through the 4th set.  A relaxed Del Potro, the one we will likely see in his next Slam appearances, will have the guns and mentality to dismiss Fed in quick order.

Perhaps the biggest knock on Fed are the his kids.  While it may be hard to hold it against him from a human perspective, Fed's looking outside the court these days.  He's established himself as the greatest player of all time (in my mind anyway).  Early in his career, Fed himself talked about the battle against history, and that battle is over.  Without that 'eternal' motivation, Fed will be a repeat 'mark' for younger guns like Del Potro, Cilic, Nadal, and even Soderling.  Every King loses their crown eventually, and Fed's time is up.  

I'm not sure. I didn't like what I saw on Monday, but what do you think?

Does Sugar Shane have a shot against Margo?  As long as he didn't get old in the Mayorga fight, Shane wins on Saturday.  And, if he is to win, Shane cements an already stellar legacy in boxing folklore.  Shane's also got some major problems with this fight, problems he's going to overcome. 

Right now I've got Shane up 40-36 after 4.  He could win the first 6.  The drama likely comes later, but could come earlier depending on Shane's recklessness factor, which is never low.  I'm trying not to think of the Shane I saw against Mayorga, that was a Shane who I perceive as being not all that motivated to fight a paper tiger. 

This isn't Mayorga he's dealing with obviously.  It's not a quality Vargas either, who Shane dismissed twice relatively handily.  Margo is no paper tiger and Shane's not scared to get hit.  What happens when Margo hits Shane with consecutive punches after round 7?  Those bludgeoning, messy, half overhand, half straight right hands that displace the other fighter's head about 5 inches.  What happens when two of those monsters land?

Cotto did it.  He won a close and controversial(in my mind) decision but never dropped Shane.  Never had Shane in imminent danger of the KO.  Cotto Konged Shane a few times, but when he had to, Shane was able to move.  I know, Margo hits with substantially more 'sick' than Cotto.  But Shane's never been KO'd, has he ever been down?

On Saturday, Shane has to be willing to play some defense, and I think he will.  Shane will jump out to a big early lead, have more respect for the power than we've seen from him in the past, and hold on to a close decision.  With the win he joins B-Hop as the two most celebrated American boxers in recent history.  

Oscar de la Hoya will not allow himself to be knocked out by Manny Pacquiao, his pride will not allow it.  If Oscar does not knock out Pac by the 5th round, Oscar will look to retire from the fight through an injury.  

There is a good chance that Oscar Kongs the Pac-Man by the end of the 5th for all the clear reasons.  Bigger, stronger, better technician.  Pac has been hurt fighting below lightweight.  Oscar can easily knock-out Pac if he hits him.  Oscar doesn't even need to score with combos, if he lands a big left hook or a straight right off a blinder jab, Pac's done. 

But if that does not happen by the 5th round, Oscar will look for the exit. Against Trinidad and Mosley, Oscar could not punch down the stretch.  Against Mayweather if he had he would've won.  But none of those guys do what Pac does.  Two of them could, but they don't.

What will the fight look like if we hear "seconds out" for the start of the 6th? It will be a Pac-attack.  And, while Pac can't truly cave Oscar's knees or blast him to the ribs ala Hopkins, Pac can swarm him, truly embodying the word relentless.  

 I will never see Oscar de la Hoya trapped in a corner, purely looking to hold, throwing one punch for every four that are landed against him.  That won't happen. The function of the rotator-cuff injury, real or not, will be to give Oscar a way out while maintaining his own perception of pride.

I'm watching this fight in part to see if I'm right.  What happens in the 6th round and beyond if Oscar's a punching a bag?  Is he really going to grind it out against a tornado?  No way.  If Oscar can't Kong Pac, Oscar will make sure this is a truly technical knock out. 

I was in 8th grade, staying over at my buddy's house. I don't know if my Dad ordered the fight that night, he usually did, but my buddy's Dad did. It was coincidence really.I had no intention of watching it,  we just happened to walk down the stairs while the indestructible Iron Mike was making his ring entrance.  We stayed to watch the inevitable car crash, the ten people in the room knew Holyfield didn't have a chance. 

Then, Real Deal roared again.

Evander is one of my favorite athletes of all time. He embodied the line on his trunks: "WARRIOR".  He wasn't a showman, he had no "Neon" to him,  no raging anger, but he knew that he could step in and lay everything on the table. Everything he had on any night would be on full display, he left nothing in the tank...still doesn't.

But now he's a side-show, a painful, easy cliche about the sport. I can't watch it. I imagine some of you can't either.

I guess the point is that I try to remember Holyfield for what he was. I wish he would stop, but the IRS has made it very clear why he can't.  I'm not sure he would quit even if that lien wasn't hanging over his head.

Even today, as a weary, brutally punch-drunk wash-up getting ready again, I'll never forget that image of him wearing out Tyson, giving us that goofy, half-sheepish smile afterwards, like 'I knew this was gonna happen'.

First of all, have you seen the press? Did you see what Thomas Hauser said about this fight? Who's he? He wrote Ali's biography, old white guy, been around for a while.  He says you don't have a chance and that this whole production is a bunch of media junk. Several welterweights have weighed in with comments in the same vein. Minus a scientific stat, the media and the boxing community say you're too small and too weak. Many notable boxing people don't think you have a chance, and more, that this thing is a joke.

I think you've got more than a chance, I think you're going to win. But, if you're extra stupid, extra emotional, or just extra ignorant, you'll get knocked out early. So here's my recipe for you busting up DLH:

1) Bottom line, your a shark, the deeper this fight goes, the better the odds you drowned him with punches. Drag DLH into the late or even mid-rounds and he becomes your punching bag. 

2) Do anything not to get hit with a clean left hook in the first five rounds. Getting hit early with a left hook is the way you lose this fight and the world chuckles to a SportsCenter teaser. 

3) On that 'first five rounds' thing, you cannot afford to fight him early. This is the only area where I question whether you're going to win this fight. I have never seen you willing to fight in a counter-first game plan.  Can you do it? For less than half a fight?

4) Fight him after the 5th round. DLH has never seen an explosive, high output fighter like you. Put him in the hornets' hive and I think the fight will be stopped in the 11th round.

Prove 'em all wrong Pac. This is your chance to secure boxing's version of  'transcendental figure' status. Mop up DLH and secure your legacy. 

The era of MMA is upon us. My coach Freddie Gatica calls it 'bum fighting'. He laments the rise of the game: "the whole purpose is to get good enough so that you don't wind up on the ground." I tend to agree. But the answer asks a more specific question, what is at the heart of 'getting good enough' at this boxing thing?

Answer: I don't know, but I've got an idea. On some level, somewhere deep and profound, this game is about artistic yet effective violence. Some combat sports, tae kwon do, most of karate, have an artistic element to them but are inherently lacking in effective, applicable violence. Boxing is not.

In the game of 'bum fighting' as Gatica called it, boxers are beginning to make their mark, to the detriment of our sport. Look up Marcus "the Irish Hand-grenade" Davis to see what a pedigreed boxer can do when he learns to survive on the ground. The base of boxing will continue to be ripped out, prospects sucked into the ever-growing limelight of MMA.

But still, there are some boxers, purveyors of artistic violence applicable in every arena, who ply their trade beautifully for us in the waning years of our sport.

Joe Calzaghe is a great athlete, but he is not one of those boxers. Joe is not a purveyor of artistic, applicable violence; he trades in the art of something else. And while we can cheer for his heart, determination, athleticism and unorthodox talent, he is a punch-line on the end of an MMA joke. That's a shame because our game deserves a better cultural representative right now, and it desperately needs one.

Joe lacks power. But more importantly, Joe has no intention of using power. Calzaghe's intention is to smother and push pace without ever closing his hands. And that's fine, that's his style and even his 'legacy', one poster on this sight said.

If that's the case, if a legitimate style in boxing includes what I saw last night, I'm not interested in watching. I can watch more effective boxing, in an applicable sense, in a different arena, in a different game.

James 'Mandingo Warrior' Kirkland signed to fight Brian Vera on the Hatton undercard Nov. 22 according to boxrec.com

You may remember Vera from his upstart yet controversial win over Irish/UK prospect Andy Lee on FNF. 

Between the two Austin, TX punchers Kirkland's occasional head movement is the only sign of defense. The card doesn't mention the weight they're fighting at, which could be important with Vera a career middle and Kirk usually a super-welter or light-middle.

At any weight I've got Kirkland winning by early KO. His straight left and upper-cut left have been brutal to date. However, Vera's got a shot with an instinct to bang and Kirkland's seemingly less than rock-solid chin. 

Also, it may be a factor that these two have logged countless sparring rounds together as THE two Austin, TX boxers besides Ramon "Randy" Gatica and Vera's younger brother Gilbert. 

Any thoughts?