What went wrong: Mark Breland

He was not durable enough for the professionals. He was a great amatuer who was overrated a bit for the professionals. I am not a believer that it was just Starling who beat him and had he not fought him he would have just had that career everyone thought. He did not have the killer instinct of a professional fighter. He would have been beaten by any top guy eventually like he was. The guy he was compared to the most is one of my favorite fighters Thomas Hearns because of height and reach. And that is where the comparison ended. He is a little taller than Hearns, but Hearns has a longer reach. Their mindset was different. Hearns had the killer instinct to go for knockouts and put it all on the line. Breland did not. Breland was more sensitive to being hit I think than Hearns was. Hearns seemed to like getting in exchanges even though sometimes he didn't take it well, but he seemed to not fear it at all. With that height and reach you go for the knockouts and test guys chins. Breland didn't have that in him and that meant he would not move forward as much and then get hit. Hearns moved forward more which takes a little power off his opponents punches. Either way Breland was a good fighter just not great. And people knew Breland couldn't take a big punch, so they waited for him to tire and eventually they hit the lottery.

 

Lanky body made for a poor chin, coupled with a lack of hunger in the pros. Beautiful jab and a lot of talent, but boxing is a funny sport. If you don't have a beard you aren't going to be great.

 

I’ve had the chance to get to know Mark a bit these last few years by happenstance. He’s even been to my parents’ house for Thanksgiving dinner with our whole family.

Let me tell you what went right — he made money, invested it properly and put it away. He’s not a super rich guy with a big flashy car and bling (although he still wears a NY Golden Gloves pendant on a chain around his neck) but he lives very comfortably and is, I believe, pretty much set for life (not that he doesn’t work or doesn’t have to, but he has a nice nest egg).

He’s one of the nicest, engaging and personable people you’d ever meet. Very down to earth. He talks in almost a whisper so you have to listen really close. I’ve been around him at fights where he’s recognized or introduced from the ring and you won’t meet anyone who is better or more appreciative of fans or more humble.

So whatever ‘went wrong’ for him in the pro ring, a lot has ‘gone right’ for him in life. I wish more ex-boxers had it as good as he does so many years after their glory days, and had made the kind of choices he has made to plan for life after boxing.

 

That’s New York. Had he been from any other city the pressure wouldn’t have been quite as bright.

 

My thought is that Breland's style worked over the 3 round amateur distance but not the 12 round pro-distance.

I'm not sure exactly why; maybe he wasn't physically strong enough? Top level pros are tougher? Or maybe 3 rounds wasn't long enough for an opponent to work him out and/or overcome his physical advantages?

Or maybe, a combination of all of the above...