Printable View
True ^ Pacquiao's lack of an inside game got exposed badly this fight. He's deceptively strong but just doesn't know how to muscle and manouver a guy on the inside to force him to the ropes where he can do his best. Plus he doesn't know how to work behind feints, stepping in and out behind them to get a guy to start committing towards himself. The "in, out movement" is there but it's strictly offensive, he feints a jab to the body, throws 1-2's then moves out. Pretty dissapointing fight overall
What go's around comes around is this a case of shit happens!, you ride your luck sometimes in this game. We must remember Manny now no's what JMM felt like on 3 occasions,! this has not killed boxing
bad decisions is part and parcel of the game like it or lump it.
Shock horror it only lasts a week I will still be a boxing fan, regardless on who wins and looses we all
de bait the decisions but we can't change it because we don't like it can we,!;)
True ^ but what sucks is that it isn't Manny's fault that he got the gift over Marquez and it isn't Bradley's fault that he got the gift over Manny. It's the judges fault. These two decisions weren't as bad the Rios joke but to have this many in quick succession is just ridiculous.
By the way does anyone know if there is any kind of qualification a judge has to attain and sustain before being given the power to fuck up this badly?
Compubox numbers should be used in conjunction with actually watching the fight. They can be quite helpful. What i saw was Bradley wobbled about 3 or 4 times throughout the fight. Pac didn't have the gas to get the knockout. Props go to Bradley for resiliency and weathering the storm.
No they didn't. Boxing and Jason vorhees are alot alike.
I think the wrong guy got the call but this was not outright highway robbery with one guy being battered, dropped, cut up etc. Manny has the fortune, fame and connects to do what thousands of no name pugs who get "robbed" do not, get redemption and ride a mass media outcry. It doesn't make it right at all but everyone just beethe a bit
Aint it a bitch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leighton
Most of the British judges if I am correct are referees, not to sure about the USA I feel referees areQuote:
Originally Posted by jahmez
qualified to judge fights. Remember split decisions always happen this fight is one of many the decision
seemed not to be the correct one. It a great pity for the fan's and boxing, but through the many years
I have been a fan this is just one more bad decisions I've seen.
Is boxing still corrupt I don't really no but were very large amount of money,are involved it makes you think does it not.!
You obviously haven't seen Whitaker v Chavez and this was nothing like that. Pacquaio was flat, he looked old and lacked the head and foot movement we have seen from him in the past 6 years, he lacked power? What was he doing just standing in front of Bradley? Where were the angles? Was he actually interested at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
This is in no way the worst decision ever, not even close. Pacquaio fought like crap and Bradley fought like he really wanted to be there. The best of Manny Pacquaio may have come and gone, it looks all downhill from here.
What Mayweather-Cotto accomplished in building boxing back up.....
..... Pacquiao-Bradley proceeded to accomplish in tearing it back down.
:( :mad:
People have been saying hes on the slide for a while now but it took about three bad fights for others to realise it. Unfortunately the Pac Floyd super fight is dead and gone now. they both robbed us of it years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by THE THIRD MANYou obviously haven't seen Whitaker v Chavez and this was nothing like that. Pacquaio was flat, he looked old and lacked the head and foot movement we have seen from him in the past 6 years, he lacked power? What was he doing just standing in front of Bradley? Where were the angles? Was he actually interested at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
This is in no way the worst decision ever, not even close. Pacquaio fought like crap and Bradley fought like he really wanted to be there. The best of Manny Pacquaio may have come and gone, it looks all downhill from here.
Oh Hulk, not this, from you;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
Dear oh dear... There have been far worse decisions than this.
It seems that you are acknowledging here that bad decisions had been made in boxing. How come you don't seem to acknowledge in the other threads the probability that a bad decision may have happened in this fight?Quote:
Originally Posted by rossOh Hulk, not this, from you;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
Dear oh dear... There have been far worse decisions than this.
Yes because a draw is a worse robbery than a loss...:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by THE THIRD MANYou obviously haven't seen Whitaker v Chavez and this was nothing like that. Pacquaio was flat, he looked old and lacked the head and foot movement we have seen from him in the past 6 years, he lacked power? What was he doing just standing in front of Bradley? Where were the angles? Was he actually interested at all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
This is in no way the worst decision ever, not even close. Pacquaio fought like crap and Bradley fought like he really wanted to be there. The best of Manny Pacquaio may have come and gone, it looks all downhill from here.
Stop playing devils advocate you bastard ! ;D
If every bad decision resulted in the death of boxing Pacquiao would still be selling doughnuts on the streets of Manilla because boxing would have ceased to exist as a sport a long time ago. Don't understand why everyone is crying about this decision as if it is the worst thing to ever happen in boxing when much more deserving fighters have been robbed, and not even in the distant past - Marquez will likely never get a legitimate win over PAC, despite beating him twice (the third time was not even close, either). Tbh I'm not even sure it was a bad decision, Manny didn't look interested at all, people forget that judges are human and prone to make mistakes, and when fighters don't look interested and box poorly whilst their opponent is salivating at the prospect of victory, utilising neat footwork and exhibiting good boxing skills - regardless of their efficacy in terms of dealing damage or scoring points - it's not altogether surprising to see them give the nod to the guy who has shown greater boxing ability and greater enthusiasm, regardless of whether compubox says he landed less punches. Some might argue that Manny did jack shit to warrant retaining his title, and although he may have deserved to win the fight I'm glad he finally got a taste of his own medicine. He's been an overrated cherry-picker for a long time now and I hope this loss means it won't be long before we see the back of him. Far from killing boxing, this may just reinvigorate it. Because if they do fight a return bout, Manny might actually term up and make an effort to reclaim his crown - or he'll lose again and be out of our hair, and someone who isn't yet jaded by all the fame and fortune that comes with being a 'p4p' king will step up and take his place. If he really can't be arsed anymore than he should just go and read the Bible to underpriviledged kids and leave boxing to true warriors and true technicians; his current attitude is an insult to those who truly love boxing, whether they are professionals or those who simply love the sport. Say what you want about Bradley's performance, but at least he respects boxing, appreciates what it can do for him, whereas PAC no longer does. If Pac's performance against Bradley were a dish sent out to me in an upmarket restaurant I would send it back. There's nothing wrong with being past your best, but when your heart is no longer in it it's time to get out and stop disappointing yourself and others.
That was an excellent post, SRR. And I have no qualms with your opinion that Manny didn't seem to want it, while Bradley was "salivating" at the shot, as you well put it. And I can understand the point about judges being human beings and being put off by attitude. You could've also added that Pacquiao didn't do himself any favors when he stupidly kept the public and his opponent waiting while he finished watching a basketball game. That in itself can be interpreted as insulting to that public and to Bradley.
But beyond that, we part company. A boxing match is supposed to be judged on results, not on attitude or even desire. If a "half-assed" Manny still fought more effectively than a "full-bore" Bradley, then the judges should have awarded him the decision. This isn't grade school, where they give you an "A" for effort. Or an elementary school field day, where they give out "participation" trophies. This is a professional boxing match, where results are the only things that matter.
I myself think Manny's on a downswing. His mind seems to be on other things now. I didn't exactly appreciate his reaction to the judges decision. It's one thing to be religious, and it's another to drain all the raw emotion out of your body in a championship fight. Meanwhile, Bradley was again, as you said, "salivating."
But still, to me and apparently to a vast majority of observers, a 75% Pacquiao was still better on that night than a 110% Bradley.