Lancenix wrote:Round 1. There was not much to choose from here. Pac landed 5 punches and Bradley 4. The round should be called even 10-10. I did not see anything to differentiate one fighter from the other.
Sounds like two fights I've seen before.
I cannot tell a lie. I'm actually playing video poker for free drinks. My wife is actually playing. I call her Golden Finger.
Pacman landed some punches at the end of the round to take the 2nd. round. Pacman does not have the explosiveness yet. Pac seems like a guy who fights in a lot more short spurts these days but the spurts get shorter. Bradley landed 6 punches Pacman 5.
Lancenix wrote:Round 1. There was not much to choose from here. Pac landed 5 punches and Bradley 4. The round should be called even 10-10. I did not see anything to differentiate one fighter from the other.
I wouldn't be surprised if you could cut and paste this analysis for the remaining rounds.
Lancenix wrote:Round 1. There was not much to choose from here. Pac landed 5 punches and Bradley 4. The round should be called even 10-10. I did not see anything to differentiate one fighter from the other.
I wouldn't be surprised if you could cut and paste this analysis for the remaining rounds.
And this is exactly why I took the Bradley +470 by DEC. You can barely split these 2 and I'll just hope Top Rank chooses to edge to the younger fighter in the stable with eyes looking forward.
Pacquiao sort of looks like a man who is looking to retire IMO, still enough there to fight but...not real hunger or desire to go out in a blaze of glory...if a win comes it comes, but not going to go out of his way to get it
Boxing Prospect wrote:Pacquiao sort of looks like a man who is looking to retire IMO, still enough there to fight but...not real hunger or desire to go out in a blaze of glory...if a win comes it comes, but not going to go out of his way to get it
Lancenix wrote:Round 1. There was not much to choose from here. Pac landed 5 punches and Bradley 4. The round should be called even 10-10. I did not see anything to differentiate one fighter from the other.
I wouldn't be surprised if you could cut and paste this analysis for the remaining rounds.
And this is exactly why I took the Bradley +470 by DEC. You can barely split these 2 and I'll just hope Top Rank chooses to edge to the younger fighter in the stable with eyes looking forward.
Boxing Prospect wrote:Pacquiao sort of looks like a man who is looking to retire IMO, still enough there to fight but...not real hunger or desire to go out in a blaze of glory...if a win comes it comes, but not going to go out of his way to get it
100% true. He's most concerned with making sure he leaves the game with his brains unscrambled at this point so he can enjoy all that money he's made. He still is out there trying, but it's not the same hungry dude trying to make a statement.
Pacman won the 4th. Pac landed 13 punches and Bradley 8. Like the announcers are saying Pacman does not have much with the right hand. It may not hurt him but he may just not trust it. I have it 2-1-1 Pac.
Both guys came out of their shell to fight and there were a lot of power punches thrown. Pac outlanded Bradley around 16 to 9. Pac won that round and is up 3-1-1 on my card.
There was a lot of movement but not a lot of landed punches. Pac had one or two flurries and there is not a ton to choose from really. I would give the round to Pac and I have him up 4-1-1. Lederman has the fight 5-1 Pacman.
