Manny Pacquiao vs Timothy Bradley

clubwelly

I def agree with most of the lads here, commentary can be very biased.
I do think Manny did enough to win but Bradley did himself justice and didn't go into protect and safey mode like Clottey & Mosley when they felt Manny's power.

Feel the biggest looser out of this one is Juan Manuel Marquez. He was supposed to be ringside with a view to Pacman Marquez 4 in Nov but that date will end up being the rematch for Bradley Pacman

Wild_Dogger

.... and with that Marquez vs Morales becomes a reality for Sept

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1217934-juan-manuel-marquez-vs-erik-morales-on-september-15-2012

Kirby

I just watched it there.

I think some people let a bit of HBO's bias cloud their viewing of the fight. None of the commentary team ever notcied or commented on Bradley's scoring punches, and there were many punches that landed for him.

I don't believe in stats. You only have to look at Compubox's "Power punch" statistic to know it is complete rubbish.

I trust my eyes and Bradley actually hit Pacquiao alot more than I think some of you realise. Go back and watch the fight with no sound, it's good adivce that some people have mentioned. Bradley just kept landing the cleaner punches during the second half where Pacquiao tired and kept coming forward and getting picked off.

Having said that, Pacquiao was the aggressor, owned 5 out of 6 rounds at the start of the fight and definitely hit Bradley with the bigger shots. Bradley landed alot of shots which is why he scored well but there was rarely any power or pop in them.

Overall I had it 7-5 Pacquiao. Bradley won 3 of the last 4 rounds which really helped him on my scorecard.

Seriously guys, this is no "robbery". It was a close decision that probably went the wrong way but I've seen worse.

walshb

It was definitely a competitive fight, as even the HBO guys said, but I still found it difficult to award it to Bradley. Have I seen worse decisions? Yes. Holyfiled getting the draw vs. Lewis was atrocious.

cowzerp

I watched it now and have to say everyone ranting and raving are clearly just shocked that the commentators got it so wrong due to their terrible bias-It was a close fight and the computabox thing is BS as Bradley was easily matching him for amount of punches if not throwing more than Manny.

The 1st half i'd say Manny won but not by any wide margin, and the 2nd half Bradley seemed to be getting the better, what really stood out for me was when the decision was been called out Bradley had his arms up feeling he'd done enough and Manny had his head hanging like he knew he did not do enough-I always say a Fighter knows if he won a fight or not, regardless which way the fight goes.

barney4001

commentaters can be very biased none more so than Jimmy Magee when an irishman is involved they see what they want to see

iLost

barney4001 wrote: »

commentaters can be very biased none more so than Jimmy Magee when an irishman is involved they see what they want to see

Remember the Dunne vs Poonsawat fight?

Bang Bang, Dunne goes down!!!
''i didn't see a punch, was it a punch or a headbutt?''

Dunne attempts to run....
''This is what he needs to do!"
Poonsawat chases after him, BANG BANG BANG Dunne goes down again.

''What is going on here. i didn't see a punch!''
''It was like the old Ali phantom punch, eh''

iLost

barney4001 wrote: »

commentaters can be very biased none more so than Jimmy Magee when an irishman is involved they see what they want to see

Remember the Dunne vs Poonsawat fight?
Jimmy Magee & Dave McAuley, horrible commentators.

Bang Bang, Dunne goes down!!!
''i didn't see a punch, was it a punch or a headbutt or what?''

Dunne attempts to run....
''This is good, this is what he needs to do!"

Poonsawat chases after him, BANG BANG BANG Dunne goes down again.

''What is going on here. i didn't see a punch!''

''It was like the old Ali phantom punch, eh''

Big Ears

cowzerp wrote: »

I watched it now and have to say everyone ranting and raving are clearly just shocked that the commentators got it so wrong due to their terrible bias-It was a close fight and the computabox thing is BS as Bradley was easily matching him for amount of punches if not throwing more than Manny.

The 1st half i'd say Manny won but not by any wide margin, and the 2nd half Bradley seemed to be getting the better, what really stood out for me was when the decision was been called out Bradley had his arms up feeling he'd done enough and Manny had his head hanging like he knew he did not do enough-I always say a Fighter knows if he won a fight or not, regardless which way the fight goes.

There's no doubt that commentators can often be extremely biased, and can affect other people's scoring. With HBO this is particularly evident with Devon Alexander as they basically act as cheerleaders for him, for the whole fight and it's most likely as a result of HBO trying to build him up as one of their star fighters.

With Sky Jim Watt seems to have a fetish for John McDermott, routinely giving him rounds for use of an ineffective jab. This is most likely just due to a personal like of McDermott rather than anything more sinister.

What's interesting to note is that in a poll of 51 boxing journalists, 48 had Pacquiao winning and just 3 had Bradley winning. A lot of these guys (although not all) were ringside so would have been unaffected by HBO or any other tv stations commentary. Although what is also very interesting in that is the 3 who scored for Bradley are all very respected journalists, Thomas Hauser, Brian Kenny and Danny Flexen.

A fighter's demeanour after the fight doesn't necessarily reflect how the fight has gone. I've seen guys thrown their arms up after getting absolutely dominated (some even deluded enough to think they actually won), and I've seen others that think/know they've won being extremely calm (eg. Morales in Morales vs Pacquiao I). Against Mosley Pacquiao was being extremely quiet and calm, right up until the scores were about to be announced and he jumped on one of the corners of the ring to salute some fans. Do you really believe that Pacquiao didn'tt think he had won ?

List of journalists:
Barry Tompkins, Showtime: 119-110 Pacquiao
Harold Lederman, HBO: 119-109 Pacquiao
Ray Markarian, The Sweet Science: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Marley, Examiner: 119-109 Pacquiao
Dan Rafael, ESPN: 119-109 Pacquiao
Vittorio Tafur, San Francisco Chronicle: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Woods, The Sweet Science: 119-109 Pacquiao
Ramon Aranda, 3 More Rounds: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mario Cabrera, Boxing Republic: 118-110 Pacquiao
Nigel Collins, ESPN: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mike Coppinger, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ace Freeman, Fight Fan: 118-110 Pacquiao
Rich Marotta, KFI Los Angeles: 118-110 Pacquiao
Kelsey McCarson, The Sweet Science: 118-110 Pacquiao
Gabriel Montoya, MaxBoxing: 118-110 Pacquiao
Pete O’Brien, USA Today: 118-110 Pacquiao
Eric Raskin, Grantland: 118-110 Pacquiao
Michael Rosenthal, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Colin Seymour, Examiner: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ryan Songalia, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Gary Andrew Poole, TIME: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ryan Burton, Boxing Scene: 117-112 Pacquiao
Scott Christ, Bad Left Hook: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Dahlberg, Associated Press: 117-111 Pacquiao
Gareth Davies, London Daily Telegraph: 117-111 Pacquiao
Doug Fischer, Ring Magazine: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Greisman, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jorge Hernandez, The Low Blow: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kevin Iole, Yahoo! Sports: 117-111 Pacquiao
Robert Littal, Black Sports Online: 117-111 Pacquiao
Steve Kim, Max Boxing: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ryan Maquiñana, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Mayo, MLive: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kieran Mulvaney, HBO: 117-111 Pacquiao
Lance Pugmire, Los Angeles Times: 117-111 Pacquiao
Chris Robinson, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Cliff Rold, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Champ Ross, Da Truth Boxing: 117-111 Pacquiao
Luis Sandoval, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jonathan Sakti, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Starks, Queensberry Rules: 117-111 Pacquiao
Richie Tomassini, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Darren Velasco, 8 Count News: 117-111 Pacquiao
Rick Reeno, Boxing Scene: 116-112 Pacquiao
George Willis, New York Post: 116-112 Pacquiao
Steve Zemach, Queensberry Rules: 116-112 Pacquiao
Armando Alvarez, Telemundo: 115-113 Pacquiao
Jake Donovan, Boxing Scene: 115-113 Pacquiao
Lem Satterfield, Ring Magazine: 115-113 Pacquiao
J.C. Casarez, Boxeo Mundial: 115-113 Pacquiao
Thomas Hauser, HBO: 115-114 Bradley
Bart Barry, 15 Rounds: 116-115 Bradley
Brian Kenny, Top Rank: 116-112 Bradley

walshb

Big Ears wrote: »

A fighter's demeanour after the fight doesn't necessarily reflect how the fight has gone. I've seen guys thrown their arms up after getting absolutely dominated (some even deluded enough to think they actually won), and I've seen others that think/know they've won being extremely calm (eg. Morales in Morales vs Pacquiao I).

This I have seen many times. Demeanour means nothing. If a fighter is robbed a fighter is robbed, no matter how he reacts straight after the final bell, or no matter how his foe reacts straight after the final bell. Manny was robbed I felt!

yore

barney4001 wrote: »

for unexplainable boxing decisions just watch the olympic boxing this year

Most amateur boxing results aren't unexplainable, many "controversial" ones are a result of strict application of the judging rules. e.g one boxer seems to be doing all the work but only lands one clean punch whereas the other fella doesn't seem to do much but gets 2 clean punches off. There are some robberies of course but I'm talking here about neutral judges for an international competition, not a local club show. There is also some room for error due to subjectivity, but a lot of people don't understand what constitutes a scoring punch and even then there is the fact that you can't score it unless you see it land. I do think the recent changes in combining the judges scores are an improvement over the old system though. I wasn't aware of them until someone on here pointed them out to me

freevoice

Watched it three times ,sound up ,sound down even watched with Metallica playing in the back ground ,same result clear win for Pacquiao.Judges score fights on clean punching (punches landed to head or body), effective aggressiveness, ring generalship, and defense. Bradley throw a fair amount of weak jabs but most of his jabs hit air or landed on pacquiaos guard ,Not landing on the zones where judges can score . .He landed very few power shots .wheres as pacquaio did land alot of powershots to both the head and body of Bradley

In the middle rounds Bradley backed away(perhaps his ankle problems forced him) from exchanges with Pac and wanted pacquiao to come towards him to counter punch because pacquiao straight left was causing problems this showed a lack of aggression on Bradleys part thus the judges shouldn't have awarded points for that.I thought Pacquiao showed he could land at will and could get by Bradleys guard at his choosing also the fact pacquiao had backed Bradley up against the ropes on a few occasions should count as good ring generalship .

Pacquiaos guard was good ,he normally is poor in this regard but against Bradley it held up well.I gave Bradley credit, he never gave up showed good stamina and was willing to exchange ,His best round was clearly the 10th and if he had a few more rounds like that one then i could see into it but he didn't.He lacked power and accuracy.I could go back over an argue that Cotto threw as many punches as Mayweather ,but the fact is Mayweather threw better, stronger and more accuarte ones.All in all i thought the Pac /Bradley fight was a poor fair with a poor judging decision,
Hope chavez /Lee bout doesn't get clowns to judge it like those

Henno30

freevoice wrote: »

Hope chavez /Lee bout doesn't get clowns to judge it like those

Don't worry, the clowns that judge the Chavez-Lee fight will be much worse.

bodyhead

Pacquiao was ahead up to round 9 and then eased off, no idea why, bradley showed he had durability but got seriously hammered earlier on. I watched it on Primeteam with commentary by Amir Khan and Wayne McCullogh pretty unbiased.
Overall it was a pretty good fight, not outstanding.

Henno30

Apparently Pacquiao-Marquez 4 is now a big possibility for Nov 10 - http://espn.go.com/boxing/story/_/id/8059156/top-rank-promoter-fernando-beltran-says-manny-pacquiao-fight-juan-manuel-marquez-not-timothy-bradley

Syferus

There's a time when I would have cared if a star of Pac's stature was involved in a controversial loss but the dicking around that's gone on between Mayweather and Pac's camps has come to typify every damnable thing that's wrong with boxing today.

sxt

I think the interest in a pacquaio v mayweather fight is considerably less interesting then it would have been 3 years ago. I think this fight has become even less interesting considering the farce decision of the pacquiao and bradley fight, in a fight that pacquaio clearly won


What is the point in pacquaio and mayweather fighting when the result has the real potential to be considerably dodgy , no matter who is the better fighter on the night...

weemcd

I'm not a boxing historian or anything like that, but it seems like 1 out of every 3 big fights these days ends in a farce

walshb

weemcd wrote: »

I'm not a boxing historian or anything like that, but it seems like 1 out of every 3 big fights these days ends in a farce

Well the fact that boxing is such a subjective sport can lead to many a discussion/debate and argument about a result, and mostly about close fights. So, in saying this I think the word "farce" is OTT.

Spazdarn

Still I wouldn't mind a few more high level knockouts to quell all the drama at every fight...

Wild_Dogger

Somebody decided to call 'Bullsiht' on the biased commentry in the Pac v Bradley fight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riSEb-hdq8M

Caseywhale

Wild_Dogger wrote: »

Somebody decided to call 'Bullsiht' on the biased commentry in the Pac v Bradley fight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riSEb-hdq8M

Now thats exactly the fight I was watching.

Caseywhale wrote: »

I must be the only one who actually saw the punches landed by Bradley.
The guys I was watching it with and commentators alike.
It was all "Oh, great right from Pac", and at the same time Bradley landed two or three of them and they never noticed, but people just see pacs punches.

Caseywhale wrote: »

Saw a lot of "Punches" that i'm sure were classed as punches from both fighters which were no more than wiping of the other guys eyebrows. As is usual in punch stats. Have even benefited from punches i've thrown like that myself in the past . Watch the fight not the stats next time.

cowzerp

Wild_Dogger wrote: »

Somebody decided to call 'Bullsiht' on the biased commentry in the Pac v Bradley fight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riSEb-hdq8M

Wow seriously wow-and people think that the commentators don't influence fights.

Spazdarn

I don't think anyone claims they don't but they definitely down size the influence they have...

Despite the video, I still think Manny wins, but the video is pretty damning of HBO

walshb

ToiletFusion wrote: »

I don't think anyone claims they don't but they definitely down size the influence they have...

Despite the video, I still think Manny wins, but the video is pretty damning of HBO

Same here. The commentary is abysmal, but Manny still deserved the nod in a competitive and average/good fight.

mrgardener

I watched this fight online with a couple of mates. The sound was so bad, we turned it down and just watched the fight.
All three of us had Pacman win by a comfortable margin.
I'm completely dumbfounded that some people actually think that Bradley won.
This was more one-sided than Pac/Marquez (which Marquez obviously won).
Not trying to insult anyone, but I think the people that think Bradley won are utterly clueless about boxing.
Pac is not the fighter he was, but he clearly won this fight.