View Full Version : Pacquia-Bradley: WTF were the judges smoking?
Exhibitman
06-10-2012, 01:09 PM
I am floored. I gave Bradley rounds 1, 10, 12, and maybe 11 at best. Even Bradley couldn't believe it--he kept saying that he had to go review the tapes and see if he won. That is not the statement of a fighter who won a fight.
Pacquiao out-landed Bradley in 10 of the 12 rounds, with a 253-to-159 advantage in total punches, 63-51 in jabs and 190 to 108 in power punches. Bradley spent most of the final part of the fight going backwards and ducking. How that wins a championship I cannot fathom.
I don't think it was a fix; the money fighter lost. Here's Bob Arum's quote to The Ring about the judging:
"These old f***s don't know what they're looking at. What do you say after this? Nothing in my career has stunned me as much as this decision."
travrosty
06-10-2012, 04:21 PM
it was so b.s. i couldnt believe it either. bradley won a few rounds, and even the most generous of scorers wouldnt have given bradley more than 5 rounds, like the one sane judge did. but even 5 rounds is a big stretch. to give bradley 7 rounds is insane. I think they wanted bradley to win so they saw a different fight than what really went down.
leon spinks beat ali but art lurie still gave his scorecard to ali, and howard cosell thought ali was ahead until the final round when he saw the scorecards and couldnt believe that spinks was leading!
I can still remember all the clean hard hits that pacquiao gave to bradley, but i can scarcely remember one or two that bradley gave to manny P.
I didn't see the fight but that is too bad. Where is the "you have to TAKE the championship" philosophy? A tie, even close to a tie (imo), goes to the champ. Word on the street is Pacquia was way too distracted to have a good fight. He has a thousand other business and personal things going on besides fighting and I guess it showed. He still thought he did enough to win but the judges didn't see it that way.
Republicaninmass
06-10-2012, 06:25 PM
HAvent paid to watch a boxing match since Hagler/leonard for this exact reason, I believe they gave that fight to Leonard based on "ring generalship" or some idiotic thing like that. I didnt see the fught, but it appears those in the know, are stunned. great set up for a re-match!
alanu
06-10-2012, 06:52 PM
I don't think it was a fix; the money fighter lost. Here's Bob Arum's quote to The Ring about the judging:
"These old f***s don't know what they're looking at. What do you say after this? Nothing in my career has stunned me as much as this decision."
How much is Arum going to make on the mandatory rematch in November....
travrosty
06-11-2012, 06:10 AM
it wasnt even a close match. there has to be another way to protect the integrity of the sports, or else have performance reviews on judges, get these clowns out of there. anybody that thinks bradley won the fight is really smoking something. bradley couldnt do anything with manny, and how does that win a fight?
D. Bergin
06-11-2012, 03:10 PM
Haven't had a chance to watch the fight yet, as I was away on the weekend. I'll review it on the replay next weekend.
I just hope this isn't a case of the HBO announcers clouding the actual outcome.
On the other hand it does set up a lucrative rematch for Pacquiao, since the Mayweather fight doesn't seem to be in the cards.
UOFLfan7
06-11-2012, 05:24 PM
Not going to lie...the results were probably fixed.
Scott T
06-12-2012, 06:21 AM
HAvent paid to watch a boxing match since Hagler/leonard for this exact reason, I believe they gave that fight to Leonard based on "ring generalship" or some idiotic thing like that. I didnt see the fught, but it appears those in the know, are stunned. great set up for a re-match!
Testify, my brother!
I know it was a loooong time ago, but that decision still ticks me off, plus the fact that SRL ducked Hagler for years.
</rant>
Jewish-collector
06-12-2012, 07:51 AM
Now boxing is just like pro wrestling !!!
carrigansghost
06-12-2012, 10:50 AM
One of my greatest boxing memories is of the recently departed Teafilio Stevenson, sorry if I misspelled his name. The olympics were his shining moments to the world. Where did boxing go wrong? I would love to see any of his memorabilia from you boxing collectors. Sorry to take this to a side track.
Rawn
carrigansghost
06-12-2012, 11:29 AM
Just want to add that he was the best technical boxer that I've ever had the privilege of seeing. IMO he would have destroyed Ali.
Rawn
tiger8mush
06-12-2012, 02:46 PM
Where did boxing go wrong?
IMO, making it pay-per-view is a major factor. How can you build a fan base if the only way to know it exists is to first pay for it? Put it on cable or over-the-air and I think it would spark more interest.
GoldenAge50s
06-12-2012, 06:09 PM
Not going to lie...the results were probably fixed.
If there was a fix, don't you suppose it would surely have gone the other way? 99% of the time bad decisions go w/ the Champ or the more popular fighter.
Manny is a big draw---Why would they want to knock him down?
I don't understand it & can't wait to see & score the fight myself.
travrosty
06-12-2012, 08:53 PM
most people from espn, hbo, elsewhere unofiicially scored the fight 9 or 10 rounds for manny, some even gave him 11 rounds.
I could even see 8 rounds, but even 7 for manny and 5 for bradley like the one judge scored it is pushing it tremendously, but for someone to give bradley 7 rounds and pacquiao only 5 is really smoking something. I hate the way boxing operates when things like this happen.
majordanby
06-13-2012, 11:13 AM
until manny and floyd fight and boxing gets rid of promoters (both issues are not mutually exclusive), i simply cannot take boxing too seriously.
Brendan
06-14-2012, 03:25 AM
Not going to lie...the results were probably fixed.
If there was a fix, don't you suppose it would surely have gone the other way? 99% of the time bad decisions go w/ the Champ or the more popular fighter.
Manny is a big draw---Why would they want to knock him down?
I don't understand it & can't wait to see & score the fight myself.
It's not an NBA fix as in having the team which will be better financially for the league win. You bet lots of money or do a million other things which will result in higher profits at +360 (for Bradley) than -450 (for Pacquaio). Sure, without the gambling aspect, Pacquaio would be better. With it? No way.
travrosty
06-14-2012, 08:55 AM
I think we should go back to newspaper decisions.
Exhibitman
06-16-2012, 05:30 AM
Just want to add that he was the best technical boxer that I've ever had the privilege of seeing. IMO he would have destroyed Ali.
Rawn
I respectfully disagree. Ali in his prime was one of the two greatest heavyweights of all time. He could hit like a heavyweight but had the hand speed, footwork and movement of a much lighter man. In his prime I'd take him over just about anyone who isn't named "Joe Louis"; now that would have been a match...
GoldenAge50s
06-18-2012, 09:11 AM
Watched the rerun Sat nite & I'd be hard pressed to give Bradley much more than 10 & 12, altho as EMan said maybe 1 & 11 as the very most possible being ultra-generous!
Some well known fight judges should be investigated for what seems like an obvious payoff.
Forgot to mention that a poll was taken via FaceBook & free only after the fight was completed and 91% were Manny, 7% Bradley & 2% said draw!