The Return of the Krusher?

Boxingnews24.com

By Donavan Leonard: Boxing is the most unforgiving sport. One minute a gladiator is the king of his domain, a standard of excellence, and the toast of pundits’ pound-for-pound lists. The next minute the pugilist has been castigated as being exposed, overrated, a hype-job, or even lacking heart. Any explanation by the warrior for the loss other than “the better man won” nearly always thrusts the fighter into the ever-growing pile of “whiners”, “quitters”, “poor sports”, and “head cases” that the boxing public finds far too easy to fill. Such is the case with Sergey Kovalev, the “Krusher.”

After winning the WBO light heavyweight title with a four-round destruction of Nathan Cleverly in August 2013, Kovalev continued his rise through both the light heavyweight ranks and the mythical pound-for-pound ranks. The eight defenses of his title included some name opponents (Bernard Hopkins, Jean Pascal twice) as well as some sanctioning organization fodder (Cedric Agnew, Blake Caparello), but the results were nearly always identical–a one-sided thrashing by Kovalev. Not every bout ended in a knockout, but he was never threatened and dominated nearly every round in those bouts. His accomplishments had rightfully earned him a spot on most pound-for-pound lists, and a win over the highly regarded Andre Ward would continue his upward trajectory in boxing, providing a resounding exclamation point to his still budding career. That win however, never appeared on his ledger.

Giving teeth to the saying that the pen is mightier than the sword (or in this case the fist), three judges somehow managed to score every single close round for Ward, resulting in Ward gaining a decision widely believed to be undeserved. The argument isn’t that the bout wasn’t competitive even after Kovalev knocked Ward down in the second round. The travesty is that in a bout at the elite level, the judges gave Ward the benefit of the doubt in every single round, including the 10th round in which Kovalev out-punched and out-landed Ward by a substantial margin (58-35, 21-16). After the bout, it was apparent that Kovalev was “Krushed”. In retrospect, with proper scoring of the bout, there would have been no rematch. However, there was a rematch, and the result was even worse for Kovalev.

Kovalev’s game plan was simple: More. Convinced that he had been robbed in the first bout (he had out-punched and out-landed Ward), he felt that he had to be even more dominant and out-punch and out-land Ward by an even wider margin. This might have been where part of the “head case” rumblings began, as it was apparent that he was not on the same page as his trainer, John David Jackson. Through seven completed rounds, Kovalev seemed to be on track with his plan of “more”. In the first bout he had connected on 59 of 245 punches through seven rounds; in the rematch he had upped those number to 83 of 361. Ward had only connected on 60 of 191 punches. Strangely though, two of the three judges had Ward ahead in the bout. Kovalev didn’t know it, but there truly was no way to win a bout with Ward without multiple knockdowns or a knockout. It didn’t happen. As has been well documented, the end came for Kovalev in the eighth round. A beautiful right hand by Ward set up the controversial knockout. Whether the ending volley was a triple-homicide of low blows or borderline legal, and whether Tony Weeks panicked by not stepping in with an eight count, the imagery is the same; Kovalev, sitting on a ring rope, bent over and showing no fight left in him. The meanest fighter in boxing had been beaten down to a meek, dispirited, humbled man.

Yes, the ending was controversial, but where was the “Krusher”, and why did he not fight fire with fire? Where was the ‘win at all costs’ attitude, the fire and vitriol that had been seen and heard from him previously? What about the “WAR” cap he had worn to the press conference a la Marvelous Marvin Hagler? Would Hagler have let an opponent continue to hit him low without retribution? There were many questions asked of Kovalev during and after the bout, and he now has his chance to answer them in the best way possible, in the ring.

Saturday night, Kovalev (30-2-1, 26 KOs) returns, which seems to be the code word in boxing for “fighting after being defeated”. His opponent, Vyacheslav Shabransky (17-1, 16 KOs) does not figure to be the type who would trouble the Kovalev who was in the ring from 2013-2016. The “whiner”, “quitter”, “head case” accusations have appeared often since the loss to Ward. Kovalev has changed trainers, and publicly sparred with his former trainer. He has seemed to have spoken out of both sides of his mouth when discussing the Ward bout–from the low blows impacting the outcome, to him not being properly trained, to outside influences preventing him from being at his best. Kovalev has every right to not accept the first “loss” to Ward, as many share his belief it was an unjust decision. He also has the right to believe that he was wronged in the second bout, and in his mind, he should still be undefeated. The controversy of the bouts will always exist, but the sport moves on, and the message to Kovalev is that fighters, especially the elite warriors, must move on as well. Boxing is unforgiving, but it is also fickle. None of the excuses, apologies, or changes in his camp will matter to boxing fans when he steps back into the ring. A dominating, “Krusher”-like performance against Shabransky, at least one to rival Sullivan Barrera’s performance against Shabransky, will put him near the top of a post-Ward world. The sky will once again be his limit, and his legacy-building ability will remain intact. Intriguing matchups with Dmitri Bivol, Oleksander Gvozdyk, Artur Beterbiev, and even an overdue bout with Adonis Stevenson are still scintillating and possible. Anything less and the critics will confirm their unappealing opinions about him, adding “best days behind him” to their list. It is now up to Kovalev to provide the answer to the only question that matters in his bout: Is the “Krusher” back?