Same as Lederman.
Printable View
Same as Lederman.
I watched the the fight off my DVR and viewed the whole thing with replays and slow-mo's between key exchanges, rooting for Bradley to pull the upset. Throughout the match, I really thought Bradley was game but struggling to land anything effective on his opponent while Manny was bullying him with power punches and pushing him back (being the overall general). When Micheal Buffer announced Tim as the winner, my jaw dropped to the floor til someone threw the towel.
Besides Rigondeaux vs Kennedy, what a stupefied night for boxing.
If it was fixed then Manny went along with it, he was in no way the same fighter who fought out of his skin against DLH, Hatton, Cotto and Margo! Where was the relentless Manny Pacquiao in this fight? Pacquiao spent most of the rounds banging his gloves together at odd times, then with 20-30 seconds left in the round he decides to throw some flurries? He simply fought poorly or wasn't interested in winning? This was not the same Manny Pacquiao pre Marquez 3, i reckon time has caught up with him or there really is something more sinister afoot? If he comes out in the rematch and blasts Bradley out in less than 3 rounds then i will agree with you about this fight being fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tam Seddon
I need to watch it again no doubt,Quote:
Originally Posted by THE THIRD MANMaybe drinking a little to much? Bradley won against an old Manny who has definitely lost his aura of invincibility that began with Marquez 3 and continued against Bradley. I had no problem with 115-113 Bradley.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tam Seddon
But how manny didn't knock him out was beyond me. Pacquiao let him into the fight it was bullshit, no doubt the fight was fixed.
Here's the thing. If this fight did poor ppv buys, there won't be a rematch and the signs are on the wall that it didn't do as well as previous Pacquiao fights.Quote:
Originally Posted by Althugz
Well..... 62 votes so far and not much action going on, so here are the results so far:
- 3/4 of all voters said "Pac by wide margin"
- Another 8% of voters said "Pac by narrow margin"
- (So basically about 83% of voters had Pac winning one way or another).
- 11% had Bradley winning by narrow margin
- 5% had it a draw
- And one person misread it as "Bradley has a wide wife" and voted "Bradley by wide margin"
I'm telling you guys, I'm one of those people who could go on and on about Pacquiao.
Especially my suspicions towards his use..
Lol
I watched that fight from a completely different language with no compubox numbers.
Pacquiao one clearly and he didn't even look too bad. Bradley was that kind of opponent where he makes it an ugly fight.
Bradley won, much like style-"predecessors", Mosely and Clottey, although unlike the "desert storm", the latter two ring warriors were unable to secure the judges nods. ;)
(Quoting myself, I fixed the link above. Idiot noob. Still don't have enough fan cards on that site.)Quote:
Originally Posted by elcolibri
I see a trend emerging that Bradley does better upon a second viewing. I don't know what that means, just an observation. Better doesn't have to mean winning, either. (Another trend seems to be "re-watch it sober", LOL.)
This is an ooold thread:
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...ore-fight.html
Taeth's post: **#1** is "clean effective punching".
Who pays 60-70 dollars for a pay per view telecast and watches the entire fight on mute?Quote:
Originally Posted by Majesty
:lolololol:Quote:
Originally Posted by amatWho pays 60-70 dollars for a pay per view telecast and watches the entire fight on mute?Quote:
Originally Posted by Majesty
Well, the poll closes in a couple of days and we've had a fairly good turnout. The results are pretty interesting, and summarized below:
- Pac by wide margin: 51 voters
- Pac by narrow margin: 5 voters
- Bradley by wide margin: 1 voter
- Bradley by narrow margin: 7 voters
- Draw: 3 voters
So close to 85% had Pac winning the fight, and over 75% of all voters had Pac by wide margin. Interestingly one voter had Bradley by wide margin. And those who saw Bradley win by either close or wide decision are right around 12%.
Considering I don't know half the people voting for Pac wide win, I have my doubts about the credibility of the poll.
It was a close fight for Manny or Bradley. But wide cards? That is lala land and I cannot take it seriously.
We were infiltrated by trolls from somewhere. We have more reasonable folk than this.
I don't know, man. Take it up with the boss. He voted "wide" also.
;D
10-2 Overall
9-3 If i gave bradley a close round.
I walked away knowing Pac got an easy decision, just to be stopped in my tracks to hear "THE NEW"
Painful moment for boxing IMO.
Yeah. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
I'm just shocked it is like this. A fair chunk HAS to be Manny boys refusing to accept it's over. It can only be.
I saw a good fight, and in fairness now call it a draw myself. I've no worries with a little blubber either way.
No robbery, not at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfYeah. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by TitoFan
I'm just shocked it is like this. A fair chunk HAS to be Manny boys refusing to accept it's over. It can only be.
I saw a good fight, and in fairness now call it a draw myself. I've no worries with a little blubber either way.
No robbery, not at all.
I'm sure there's some of that in there, Miles. But even beyond this forum, I think other numbers are pretty similar in nature. Check out fightscorecollector's numbers. I think they're pretty wide also. I don't know, honestly. Maybe some of it was the announcers themselves. I mean, we're all human and probably subconsciously subject to some influence from the audio portion of the telecast. But I think most of us try to really, objectively observe the fight and all its details. People here love to dump on CompuBox, but it's easy to sit back and say that something doesn't work, when you yourself (not you, Miles) don't have a suggestion on how to improve what we have. On a fast-paced fight such as this one, CompuBox is the only tool available that attempts to count # of punches thrown and landed. THAT, in conjunction with our own interpretation of what we're seeing, is the best we can do.
That being said, it IS a little odd that "Pac by narrow margin" actually had LESS votes than "Bradley by narrow margin." With the avalanche of voters for "Pac by wide margin", it's statistically a little odd that "Pac by narrow margin" didn't have more votes.
I've always perceived people as being of lesser forms. For instance, most people are less intelligent than me when put to the test. A boxing fight allows too many lesser forms to come out and so they win the poll with all their emotional pride intact.
I mean people who are fanboys, who had money vested and in the audience who could see nothing itself. Most people voting Manny won by a margin are frauds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Oh-h-h........... ok.
My mistake... I thought we were having a normal conversation.
Excuse me while I beam myself back to Earth.
;D
No, people are idiots and the Manny fan sterotype fits it big time. They are winning these polls, but they are wrong.
It was a close fight. Anyone can see that. You just have to learn to score a fight minus HBO.
I remember that you insisted that the Pacquiao-Marquez III is a robbery based on the polls and the number of people who believed that Marquez won. Now you are discrediting these polls and those very same people. What gives? And it's obvious that more people thinks that this Pacquiao-Bradley fight is a robbery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Like what I said before. the scores of only three people matters in a fight and it was given to Bradley. Timothy Bradley, therefore, is the winner. But the perception of this significant number of people can not be ignored. Quite a number of people loss their bets in an obviously unfair decision. And boxing's image has been tarnished further.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InTheNeutralCornerI remember that you insisted that the Pacquiao-Marquez III is a robbery based on the polls and the number of people who believed that Marquez won. Now you are discrediting these polls and those very same people. What gives? And it's obvious that more people thinks that this Pacquiao-Bradley fight is a robbery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Like what I said before. the scores of only three people matters in a fight and it was given to Bradley. Timothy Bradley, therefore, is the winner. But the perception of a significant number of people can not be discarded. Quite a number of people loss their bets in an obviously unfair decision. And boxing's image has been tarnished further.
Commonly referred to as a "double standard."
;)
What a dumb thing to say. You are a whingeing spoilt baby with all the intelligence of a retarded Dairy cow. Only your tits probably leak more and you have obviously spent more of your life with someone's arm up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Lesser forms? You elitist tit.
Here is a comment I saw on HBO-Boxing's Facebook wall:
"
The Pacquiao vs. Bradley fight was such a prime example of how the promoters are duping the boxing public out of their hard-earned cash. We need to stop paying to watch superstars like Pacquiao and Mayweather fight lesser opponents like Bradley while they duck each other. They are making too much money off of these lesser bouts and every now and again the promoters rig the outcomes, so as to create a re-match scenario. The only way we will put an end to this nonsense is by boycotting and refusing to pay the pay-per-view fees for these inferior contests. If we continue to pay for these inferior contests, then we have no one to blame but ourselves because we're the suckers who are paying and supporting it...if we withhold our money, then the promoters will no longer make these huge premiums on these inferior contests. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to pay to see a Bradley-Pacquiao rematch. It's absolutely ludicrous! Pacquiao won at least 11 rounds...it wasn't even close and there's nothing that would lead a knowledgeable boxing fan to believe that Bradley could ever do anything differently to close the gap!"
... Well, I scored it even. A draw.
When I watched it live I thought (or maybe "assumed"?) Pacquiao had won but watching it last night from my own perspective (i'll explain) it was - round by round - a lot closer.
I think the odd punch from Pacquiao here and there had fooled me the first time round when I was watching the fight with my mind pre conditioned by what Id concluded (on what judges look for) after 3 very close fights with Marquez (which ironically, I now realise were NOT "robberies" either) where Pacquiao was rewarded for being the more athletic and damaging puncher in the smallest of instances.
However upon watching the fight I saw a very inconsistent and lackluster performance in parts from Manny who basically threw the win away. Not to take credit away from Bradley who hung tough in a major way but he wasn't causing Manny any major problems with his boxing.... Which is why, I guess why so many people fell aggrieved by the decision.
Oh fuck off with your bizarre talk about tits and arses.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzWhat a dumb thing to say. You are a whingeing spoilt baby with all the intelligence of a retarded Dairy cow. Only your tits probably leak more and you have obviously spent more of your life with someone's arm up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Lesser forms? You elitist tit.
On a positive note it seems a lot of people are seeing the fight much closer after the replay. Some lower forms only need a second viewing and a couple of fingers in the ears to start seeing sense.
It was a close fight and no robbery.
How many points did you take off Manny for his views on gay marriage?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAHAH:rofmaoal:Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamGB
Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfOh fuck off with your bizarre talk about tits and arses.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzWhat a dumb thing to say. You are a whingeing spoilt baby with all the intelligence of a retarded Dairy cow. Only your tits probably leak more and you have obviously spent more of your life with someone's arm up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Lesser forms? You elitist tit.
On a positive note it seems a lot of people are seeing the fight much closer after the replay. Some lower forms only need a second viewing and a couple of fingers in the ears to start seeing sense.
It was a close fight and no robbery.
Au contraire, my extraterrestial friend. After last night's replay, a lot of those "lower life forms" apparently voted in favor of a Pac victory by over 90%, mirroring pretty much the results of this poll.... and also on par with other polls taken after the event itself last Saturday.
Bradley by wide margin. If Pac landed all those poonches you're speaking of, Bradley would've been floored. Bradley's hits were clean and accurate.
Stop whining, pactards...
http://sfist.com/attachments/SFist_Brock/crybaby.png
Are you sure you want to put your profile pic on the main board?Quote:
Originally Posted by GOAT
Rewatching. This poll is based on initial viewing.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by GandalfOh fuck off with your bizarre talk about tits and arses.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzWhat a dumb thing to say. You are a whingeing spoilt baby with all the intelligence of a retarded Dairy cow. Only your tits probably leak more and you have obviously spent more of your life with someone's arm up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Lesser forms? You elitist tit.
On a positive note it seems a lot of people are seeing the fight much closer after the replay. Some lower forms only need a second viewing and a couple of fingers in the ears to start seeing sense.
It was a close fight and no robbery.
Au contraire, my extraterrestial friend. After last night's replay, a lot of those "lower life forms" apparently voted in favor of a Pac victory by over 90%, mirroring pretty much the results of this poll.... and also on par with other polls taken after the event itself last Saturday.
People seem to be coming around to the fact that it was a close fight and that Manny wasn't as effective as the 'stats' and propaganda were suggesting.
I saw the fight live on PPV and then at home one week later and my score was 117-114 for Manny although before the fight I thought that Bradley could only win if he cut off the ring and made it an ugly fight. He didn't do it and he lost because he wasn't fast enough and he didn't throw sharp enough punches and I thought I was generous in my assessment of his abilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzAre you sure you want to put your profile pic on the main board?Quote:
Originally Posted by GOAT
Are you sure you're a real person or just a bot from the edge of nowhere?!
The idea that Bradley won by a WIDE Margin removes any element of objectivity from your argument. On top of that you then suggest that anyone thinking otherwise is a Pactard. After quite an embarrassing performance against someone who turned out to be more of a fart in a sandpit than a desert storm, most Pactards are probably in mourning. Like myself many who nonetheless saw Manny winning comfortably despite this, also thought Marquez beat him if not twice than at least on one occasion. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't spit your dummy out when it is not held by everyone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by GOATQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzAre you sure you want to put your profile pic on the main board?Quote:
Originally Posted by GOAT
Are you sure you're a real person or just a bot from the edge of nowhere?!
I had it a draw. I still score it a draw and see it as a close fight in. Nowt wrong with the decision really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzThe idea that Bradley won by a WIDE Margin removes any element of objectivity from your argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by GOATQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzAre you sure you want to put your profile pic on the main board?Quote:
Originally Posted by GOAT
Are you sure you're a real person or just a bot from the edge of nowhere?!
The idea of questioning the judges removes any element of relevance from this thread.
Judges are god. End of story.
I don't believe in God or his/her nefarious edictsQuote:
Originally Posted by GOATQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzThe idea that Bradley won by a WIDE Margin removes any element of objectivity from your argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by GOATQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzAre you sure you want to put your profile pic on the main board?Quote:
Originally Posted by GOAT
Are you sure you're a real person or just a bot from the edge of nowhere?!
The idea of questioning the judges removes any element of relevance from this thread.
Judges are god. End of story.
Time to open up a can of worms....has anyone seen this video yet?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riSEb-hdq8M
Watch it tell me what you think