OK... how did you score the Pac-Bradley fight?

[InTheNeutralCorner]

My Filipino neighbor that drove himself to drink after the third Marquez fight, I ran into outside my door just getting some night air. He had Pacquiao winning 7-5 and I had Bradley winning 7-5 and he was fine with it. He said there was a lot of close rounds and he muted the HBO telecast himself.

It's not out of the question to see this fight 7-5 for either guy or even a draw. No Robbery just a close fight and all about what you're looking for.

Who pays 60-70 dollars for a pay per view telecast and watches the entire fight on mute?

[TitoFan]

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%.

[Gandalf]

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.

[TitoFan]

I don't know, man. Take it up with the boss. He voted "wide" also.

[cnote111]

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.

[Gandalf]

I don't know, man. Take it up with the boss. He voted "wide" also.

Yeah.

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.

[TitoFan]

I don't know, man. Take it up with the boss. He voted "wide" also.

Yeah.

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.

[Gandalf]

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.

[Gandalf]

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.

[TitoFan]

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.

Oh-h-h........... ok.
My mistake... I thought we were having a normal conversation.

Excuse me while I beam myself back to Earth.

[Gandalf]

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.

[InTheNeutralCorner]

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.

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.

[TitoFan]

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.

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."

[Beanz]

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.

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.

Lesser forms? You elitist tit.

[DivineAdventures]

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!"