In the past I've asked posters to explain what makes them qualified to assess coaches. Most never bothered to answer that post. I'm "assuming" Top Rank thinks highly of him for sending Pavlik to him and we know Top Rank's interest in the matter.
coaches don't win fights, fighter win fights. Why are we blaming coaches when they don't have total control of the fighter.
Garcia should have never let Margarito get beat until he was Chinese. Garcia is a fool. This content is protected
he was telling Rios to Jab his way in while weaving and throw the left hook everytime abril throws his right. which was good advice.
I been said Garcia was overrated, with how he ruined Margarito, his fighters have no strategy, they only try slugging it out, take unnecessary punishment and hopes their opponents wear down
Garcia is a really good trainer, the "prisoner of the moment" stuff makes it hard to take you seriously. What criteria do you use to evaluate a trainer, what are you basing your evaluation on?
When asking the question I've only remember ever receiving one response and the person admitted shaky criteria. This goes back to team sports where, when you can't fire the whole team, you simply fire the manager to appease the fans.
Did he focus in training on teaching Rios to hit a guy in close quarters who is turning him and using the shoulder roll? Did he track down all the available film on Abril and study him with his fighter? Did he prepare for a fight full of clinching? If not, this was a serious oversight. I also saw Garcia shadow-boxing in the corner, a la Zab Judah's dad. Isn't it too late at that point?