Pacquiao vs. Bradley Spoiler

[bob_bask]

Did anybody give the fight to Bradley?

Is there any dispute over who really won the fight, unlike Pacquiao-Marquez III?

[Brooks TVB]

No way did Bradley win that fight he barely won 2 rounds.

[kenyan_cheena]

I thought it was pretty close. I thought Bradley had the better of rounds 1, 2, 10, 11 and 12. Manny dominated from 3-6, but 7, 8 and 9, you could've gone either way. I don;t know what fight Dan Rafael was watching, as he onlt gave Bradley one round.

[Thunder]

I figured my first post here in seven months would be to laugh at the people who are still hoping for TB 3.0.

Instead it's to say I feel like I got robbed tonight. I was a huge boxing fan for 35 years and now I realize it's become total ****. How can you care so much again after that farce?

For the record, I was right on with Harold, 11-1.

[rudel.dietrich]

Tonight was the straw that broke the camels back for me. I am done with boxing once and for all. Why should I continue to put my time and effort into something that is completely and utterly broken.

[Jackyle]

I thought Bradley won 2 rounds at best, that is the worst decision I have seen in a long time. 2 rounds is being nice. Manny toyed with him, it was a joke.

[sepia warrior]

Utterly disgraceful. I had a bad feeling when the judges were announced and my gut was right.

[IceTea]

I had it 115-113 for Manny. It's far from the worst decision I've seen, but it left a lot of money on the table. They should have made the Mayweather fight a year ago.

Manny was fading fast after round 8.

[Jackyle]

Yeah, can't see more then 2 rounds for Bradley, maybe 3. I think I may just be done with boxing.

[kenyan_cheena]

Originally Posted by IceTea

I had it 115-113 for Manny. It's far from the worst decision I've seen, but it left a lot of money on the table. They should have made the Mayweather fight a year ago.

Manny was fading fast after round 8.

This.

I'm not saying I though Bradley should have won, but the way some people are reacting is crazy. How can anyone honestly say Manny did anything to win the last three rounds? Or that he was clearly better in the opening two?

[IceTea]

Originally Posted by Jackyle

Yeah, can't see more then 2 rounds for Bradley, maybe 3. I think I may just be done with boxing.

I said that after the Bowe brawl at the Garden 15 years ago. I was back within a week. Once boxing has it's tines in you, you're cooked forever. You're a great fan - it needs ya.

[IceTea]

Originally Posted by kenyan_cheena

This.

I'm not saying I though Bradley should have won, but the way some people are reacting is crazy. How can anyone honestly say Manny did anything to win the last three rounds? Or that he was clearly better in the opening two?

I gave Bradley the 1, 8, 10, 11, 12.

[Irrelevant Dude]

Who/what is to stop boxing from completely revamping their scoring system?

There doesn't seem to be any reason to preserve the system as it is currently designed. The sport has been on the decline for several years and poor judging is only hastening that decline.

It is extremely frustrating to see poor decisions time and time again with relatively little recourse. In an era where virtually all other sports have adopted some form of instant replay, boxing continues to plod ahead.

I'm not saying that boxing should use instant replay, because that wouldn't really make sense, but there are certainly other changes that could be made. What about moving to a larger panel of judges who don't sit at ringside, but instead watch the fight (without commentary) in isolated booths at a remote location? Is there really any reason for judges to sit ringside?

In addition to using a larger panel of remote judges, add a grading system for those judges and you would see much more accurate scoring. Why does the sport continue to allow fights to be ruined by 3 ungoverned stooges at ringside?

[Tommysixfingers]

Didn't see the fight but a friend of mine had it 7-5 to Manny. A case of kharma perhaps. I don't know, Manny often seem to attract some controversy.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by kenyan_cheena

This.

I'm not saying I though Bradley should have won, but the way some people are reacting is crazy. How can anyone honestly say Manny did anything to win the last three rounds? Or that he was clearly better in the opening two?

Manny landed more punches in 10 out of the 12 rounds.
Manny landed the harder punches.

Sometimes punch stats are overblown. But when you're +100 for the fight and land somewhere around 19 out of the 20 hardest punches in the fight . . you get 11 rounds.

If that means I'm crazy, so be it.

[BigBoyBrackey]

Two rounds for Bradley would be generous. I thought Bradley's best round was the first, and Pacquaio still won it by landing three shots in the last 30 seconds that did more damage than anything Bradley landed all night.

Bradley was busier in the later rounds, but busy does not always mean effective. I was surprised the punch stats were even as close as they were -- I didn't think Bradley landed 20 clean shots all night.

That Arum -- who promotes both guys and stands to make a killing on a rematch that's only possible because of the decision -- thought it was outrageous says quite a bit.

Of course, as galling as these decisions can be, especially if you disagree, they're one of the unique things about the sport. In team and individual sports with less arbitrary forms of score-keeping, you can argue that the better contestant didn't win, but you usually can't debate the final outcome.

Marquez must be more pissed than anybody but Manny. Pardon the pun.

[comicfanman]

The more we see things like this, the more you lean towards the corruption in boxing. Judges paid off to make bad calls.

I could give you a close fight if they had to make it close, but to give the nod to Bradley is a punch in the gut to fight fans. I am a Bradley fan, but did not think he would win this fight and as we watched he did not. You could see by round 6 he was walking back to the corner with head held low. He was not ready for the Manny power.

Manny did seem to lay off in the later round which I thought was a mistake, but still did enough the entire fight to win.

I might have given Bradley 4 rounds. My brother gave him 5 to be generous.

What can you do? I for one will now stop paying for PPV - sick to my stomach to watch a good match and then watch the victor lose the decision. It sure made me think about how the promoter had set up the rematch clause for Nov. 10th if Bradley won. Ya think money played a part in this? ummm.... I am leaning towards YES


Good thing I have my favorite SIM - TBCB!!!!!

[TBPauly]

Originally Posted by ChiefIlliniwek

Who/what is to stop boxing from completely revamping their scoring system?

There doesn't seem to be any reason to preserve the system as it is currently designed. The sport has been on the decline for several years and poor judging is only hastening that decline.

It is extremely frustrating to see poor decisions time and time again with relatively little recourse. In an era where virtually all other sports have adopted some form of instant replay, boxing continues to plod ahead.

I'm not saying that boxing should use instant replay, because that wouldn't really make sense, but there are certainly other changes that could be made. What about moving to a larger panel of judges who don't sit at ringside, but instead watch the fight (without commentary) in isolated booths at a remote location? Is there really any reason for judges to sit ringside?

In addition to using a larger panel of remote judges, add a grading system for those judges and you would see much more accurate scoring. Why does the sport continue to allow fights to be ruined by 3 ungoverned stooges at ringside?

In most parts of the world, the 10 point must system has been used now for the last 30-40 years. Time to throw it out and go the amateur system of scoring one point per punch, even if that system is as flawed as others.

[TBPauly]

Originally Posted by comicfanman

The more we see things like this, the more you lean towards the corruption in boxing. Judges paid off to make bad calls.

I could give you a close fight if they had to make it close, but to give the nod to Bradley is a punch in the gut to fight fans. I am a Bradley fan, but did not think he would win this fight and as we watched he did not. You could see by round 6 he was walking back to the corner with head held low. He was not ready for the Manny power.

Manny did seem to lay off in the later round which I thought was a mistake, but still did enough the entire fight to win.

I might have given Bradley 4 rounds. My brother gave him 5 to be generous.

What can you do? I for one will now stop paying for PPV - sick to my stomach to watch a good match and then watch the victor lose the decision. It sure made me think about how the promoter had set up the rematch clause for Nov. 10th if Bradley won. Ya think money played a part in this? ummm.... I am leaning towards YES


Good thing I have my favorite SIM - TBCB!!!!!

The amazing thing about this fight was if it was going to be rigged, it'd make sense to rig it towards Packy, not against him. A Mayweather-Packy fight would be a big boost to the economy of whoever gets it, Las Vegas being the main candidate.

When Mayweather beat Cotto a month ago, I felt the scores were a little generous in favor of Money. Very intrigued that Pacquiao didn't get a similar break. If Packy and Money should ever meet in that town, Manny better be going for the knockout, because now we know he won't get a favorable decision.

[Ric915]

i'm of the group who gave Bradley 2 rounds i really like the kid but he did not come close to winning that fight