Pacquiao vs Bradley Saturday night fight thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CFH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

I dont really care for the decision anyway. Or even for the sport at this point.

I just wanted to point out that people who said Bradley won this fight clearly were also the ones that said JMM clearly got robbed in all the fights. lol

---

You're not the only one who noticed that.

And you're also not the only one who doesn't really care about the sport any more.

---

For some reason I'm getting into hockey now and trying to learn all that I can about the sport. It has to do with the Kings amazing run. Hockey is Less corrupt, plenty of good action, and also a sport that can be very violent at times just like boxing. Hockey is starting to be my next favorite sport after American football.

---

You live in LA, right?

I used to be a massive hockey fan, I probably watched or listened to 95% of the Vancouver Canucks games for about a decade, but my interested took a nose-dive this year. Probably something to do with watching a bunch of morons try to burn down their city because of a sport.

---

Near LA, like the next county over. Shouldn't let a few moronic fans ruin a sport for you. In the NHL at least the best will compete against the best, most fans will give respect to the opposing team that just beat theirs and not make sorry excuses, and the sport although with some problems is much less corrupt than boxing and isn't saddle with politics.

---

It was tens of thousands of fans, unfortunately.

Worst decision I've seen since Forrest-Quartey. Absolutely horrific.

I should be in bed, but I still cannot not wash that nasty taste of a decision out of my mouth

Could one of you 11 whos on the who's online chat screen, see if you can open a window to me please, Im having troubles for some reason.Trying to message someone its not working wonder if its my end or theres .
thanks.

I've gone rooted against Pacquiao since just about the first time I saw him fight over 9 years ago.
He's made me lose money on multiple occasions.
I don't like saying this but, that's what he gets.

I just wish they would have gave Marquez the honor of having the win on his record.
He's the one who really deserved it.

I think people are going way overboard just because Pac didn't get the close rounds. I didn't see half as much shit from hbo when marquez lost a close fight. I mean Lewis Holyfeild is a robbery to me not this.

One thing I can't wrap my head around is that there were times when it seemed like PAC had Bradley dazed and back peddling, but he didn't move in for the ko. I mean I could understand that PAC didn't want to run into something but it seemed like in the last half that there were rounds with a whole lotta nothing going on until the last minute. Up until that last minute nothing but defensive moves and jabs by Bradley.

So yeah, I could kinda see where the judges may have had it for Bradley. Was it the right call? No, but such is life. People will still pay to see PAC fight...if he chooses to continue fighting.

Well looking at the scorecards form the judges i can see a few things 2,5,7,8,10,11,12 i can see a case for Bradley winning those rounds. Do i think it could of gone the other way yea but they were close.

Another important fact that even the HBO commentators were stating, Manny took 2 minutes off in every round of the second half of the fight.

It turned very 'Sugar Ray vs Marvin'esque.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

Another important fact that even the HBO commentators were stating, Manny took 2 minutes off in every round of the second half of the fight.

It turned very 'Sugar Ray vs Marvin'esque.

---

And like Sugar Ray he banked in early rounds and tried to steal a few late ones.

It just didn't work this time. And while Sugar Ray had the excuse for not fighting for years so that strategy against a monster like Hagler is smart cause cardio-wise there is NO way he was gonna stay with him. Pacquiao really has no such excuse.

One thing that shouldn't be overlooked is that this was a pretty fun fight to watch. Bradley fought on his backfoot and didn't engage as much as I would like, but he was more controlled than he has been in the past. Pacquiao took more time off during rounds than he has too. At the same time, I thought Pacquiao looked very sharp at moments. Frankly, Cotto v. Mayweather and Bradley v. Pacquiao were good super events. Usually, mega events are disappointing, but that wasn't the case for me at least.

Also, regardless of the controversy in the result, I thought Bradley fought a controlled, tempered fight, and proved he belongs at the elite level.
@Chino - do you give Bradley some credit now or do you still think he is rubbish?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Also, regardless of the controversy in the result, I thought Bradley fought a controlled, tempered fight, and proved he belongs at the elite level.
@Chino - do you give Bradley some credit now or do you still think he is rubbish?

---

I was not expecting Manny to get robbed the way he did specially after the biggest fight in boxing awaits vs Floyd. Now Manny knows how it feels to get robbed.

As for Tim. I give him credit for not being intimidated when he was almost knocked down. I would expect him to get into survival mode after that but he continued to look for Manny after a few rounds of backing up. If Tim had more power to his punches he would have Manny's face busted by round 4. Don't understand why Manny didn't go for the kill in the early rounds where Tim was clearly in wobbly legs. I credit Tim for his bravery. Something Shane Mosley could have used when he faced Manny and Mosley would have had a better chance of hurting Manny.

Very interesting;D results that will take days and hours to debate and discuss.:cool:

Judges were worried they would be seen to be favouring pacquiao so gave bradley some early close rounds for insurance against their reputation. They werent ready for bradley to sweep the last 3 rounds and nick it on their cards. Bad result but i understand it

Does anyone find it odd that a rematch date has already been set the night of the fight?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrbig1

Does anyone find it odd that a rematch date has already been set the night of the fight?

---

I do not think a rematch is warranted from a business perspective nor a boxing perspective. It was a good, competitive fight--it's just not one the public will be clamoring for. I've read that the demand for this fight was less than that of previous Pacquiao fights. I anticipate it will record less ppv buys than that of Pacquiao recent performances. Frankly, a Bradley vs. Marquez fight is the way to go. Pacquiao should consider other opponents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rantcatrat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrbig1

Does anyone find it odd that a rematch date has already been set the night of the fight?

---

I do not think a rematch is warranted from a business perspective nor a boxing perspective. It was a good, competitive fight--it's just not one the public will be clamoring for. I've read that the demand for this fight was less than that of previous Pacquiao fights. I anticipate it will record less ppv buys than that of Pacquiao recent performances. Frankly, a Bradley vs. Marquez fight is the way to go. Pacquiao should consider other opponents.

---

I don't think Bradley deserves a rematch with Pacquiao either, we all know who won the fight, and we all know who the Champion still is, Bradley's trinket is worthless.

As for another Marquez fight, it's really pointless and would have a similar result to the other 3. If I were Manny i'd tell boxing to fuck off and retire.

Fine decision. Pacs career should of ended after Marquez. Boxing needs human beings, not robots.

As I stated earlier on Saturday that I would watch the fight again on slow-motion with 5 other people to judge every round, atching it in slow motion took us four hours mind you. We watched it twice times and the closest that we ever came was 8-4 Pacquaio-Bradly.

Our Criteria for scoring rounds followed the general rules, effective aggression, ring generalship, offense/defense...Etc.

It is impossible to give Bradley the winning decision.

I also posted that we'd watch the fighters geography and their location in regards to the judges, i.e. if their backs are turned to the judges how can the judge tell if they blocked a punch or not? We noticed that one judge (the one sitting between the Blue corner to Neutral corner to its right The score sheet
) had a propensity to assume Bradley's punches landed and Manny's did not whenever the fighter's back was turned to them.

Long story short, didn't really see corruption as much as we did incompetence. However in my belief it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that Emmanuel Pacquiao was the winner of this fight.




P.S
For those who say this is karma for Marquez (I too agree Marquez won the last fight) what you must remember is that a bad decision is a bad decision. This is true regardless of whom the winner and the loser are. This is regardless of your feelings for the fighter. This is regardless of the fact that the fighter could be an unknown or a superstar. The fighter who wins the fight should always get the decision. There should never be ambiguity about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

As I stated earlier on Saturday that I would watch the fight again on slow-motion with 5 other people to judge every round, atching it in slow motion took us four hours mind you. We watched it twice times and the closest that we ever came was 8-4 Pacquaio-Bradly.

Our Criteria for scoring rounds followed the general rules, effective aggression, ring generalship, offense/defense...Etc.

It is impossible to give Bradley the winning decision.

I also posted that we'd watch the fighters geography and their location in regards to the judges, i.e. if their backs are turned to the judges how can the judge tell if they blocked a punch or not? We noticed that one judge (the one sitting between the Blue corner to Neutral corner to its right The score sheet
) had a propensity to assume Bradley's punches landed and Manny's did not whenever the fighter's back was turned to them.

Long story short, didn't really see corruption as much as we did incompetence. However in my belief it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that Emmanuel Pacquiao was the winner of this fight.




P.S
For those who say this is karma for Marquez (I too agree Marquez won the last fight) what you must remember is that a bad decision is a bad decision. This is true regardless of whom the winner and the loser are. This is regardless of your feelings for the fighter. This is regardless of the fact that the fighter could be an unknown or a superstar. The fighter who wins the fight should always get the decision. There should never be ambiguity about it.

---

Kudos for the effort to really analyze the fight and reach the best conclusion possible from your perspective.

I really did it just to see if it was a robbery or not and what I got was was pure incompetence.

Bob Arum requests AG inquiry into judges' disputed Manny Pacquiao-Timothy Bradley decision - ESPN

It seems as if Bob Arum wants to get the decision overturned. Maybe trying to make it look like he hadn't fixed the fight and screwed Pac over. Lets see what happens...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DavilaJones

As I stated earlier on Saturday that I would watch the fight again on slow-motion with 5 other people to judge every round, atching it in slow motion took us four hours mind you. We watched it twice times and the closest that we ever came was 8-4 Pacquaio-Bradly.

Our Criteria for scoring rounds followed the general rules, effective aggression, ring generalship, offense/defense...Etc.

It is impossible to give Bradley the winning decision.

I also posted that we'd watch the fighters geography and their location in regards to the judges, i.e. if their backs are turned to the judges how can the judge tell if they blocked a punch or not? We noticed that one judge (the one sitting between the Blue corner to Neutral corner to its right The score sheet
) had a propensity to assume Bradley's punches landed and Manny's did not whenever the fighter's back was turned to them.

Long story short, didn't really see corruption as much as we did incompetence. However in my belief it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that Emmanuel Pacquiao was the winner of this fight.




P.S
For those who say this is karma for Marquez (I too agree Marquez won the last fight) what you must remember is that a bad decision is a bad decision. This is true regardless of whom the winner and the loser are. This is regardless of your feelings for the fighter. This is regardless of the fact that the fighter could be an unknown or a superstar. The fighter who wins the fight should always get the decision. There should never be ambiguity about it.

---

Even though I have the same result, With the WBO appointing 5 Judges to reviewing the fight, I am expecting a new decision to come from the WBO resulting in a draw and ordering a rematch. Regardless of the true results.