BoxRec

ashedward wrote:Benny Ricardo on Primetime was truly appaling biased in favour of Pacman and i`m sure HBO didn`t give Bradly credit for anthing and only giving Bradley a round is shocking.I thought Pac won 7-5 but the way some people like fat Dan are bleating is way over the top.

boxerrob2005 wrote:I need to watch the fight again because I thought the fight was quite close.
I thought Bradley took the first and then it was all Pac Man until the championship rounds.
If you scored the first to Bradley and the last 4 also to Bradley then you got a pretty close fight. Some people marked Bradley as winning the 2nd too so that would make it 6 rounds each.
Fight reminded me a bit of de la hoya - trinidad.

boxerrob2005 wrote:I am clearly in the minority in thinking the fight was close so I accept i probably judged this one wrong.

There definitely needs to be a change in how fights are scored.
You get the same amount of points if you just nick a round or if you completely dominate without scoring a knockdown.

King Geedorah wrote:

Quixall wrote:Just watcched the Pacquaio vs Bradley fight........

How on earth you get a a split decison win for Bradley, i do not know. There is a case for saying that Bradley won the 11th and 12th rounds and possibly, just possibly drew the 10th and definately won the 9th, but that's it. It took him seven rounds to realise and deal with Pacquaio's power and only in the last three rounds did he start to use tactics that should have been used from the opening bell. Most of Bradley's shots were landing on Pacquaio's gloves and when Bradley did have some success, he was equalled by Pacquaio, but most of all Bradley was out gunned for 75% of the fight. I have watched fights and seen bad decisions so often now, that it has totally spoiled my interest in the sport. The last bad one was Marquez being denied a victory over Pacquaio, so maybe they tried to equal that up with this fight. Even if you did have the fight closer than say Harold Letterman and had it by say two or three rounds, then i'm pretty sure most people would have given the fight to Pacquaio. When i heard that first 115-113, i thought " Oh dear......." and then when Bradley got a 115-113 i was shaking my head, because i just knew that the decision was going to go to Bradley. Having witnessed this type of thing so many times in recent years and with my interest in the sport waining anyway, this fight was the last straw for me. The sport is bent, pure and simple, whether you want to blame incompeteant judges or not, the sport stinks to high heaven. I didn't even want Pacquaio to win, but i am a fair judge when it comes to scoring fights and this was another travesty. That's it for me, i'm done, just totally fed up of watching arseholes fuk up a sport i once loved........Goodnight !!

Ps For what it's worth Mayweather will beat both Bradley and Pacquaio with ease.

Roger and OUT

In your rush to leave the sport behind, you appear to have locked yourself in a boxing forum and someone is continuing to post about boxing under your name

What am I saying, he can't hear me -- he's too busy watching lawn green bowling.

Srebmun wrote:

ashedward wrote:Benny Ricardo on Primetime was truly appaling biased in favour of Pacman and i`m sure HBO didn`t give Bradly credit for anthing and only giving Bradley a round is shocking.I thought Pac won 7-5 but the way some people like fat Dan are bleating is way over the top.

I loved how Wayne at times had a different opinion, giving Tim rounds where Benny wasn't and it was stumping him.

Srebmun wrote:

ashedward wrote:Benny Ricardo on Primetime was truly appaling biased in favour of Pacman and i`m sure HBO didn`t give Bradly credit for anthing and only giving Bradley a round is shocking.I thought Pac won 7-5 but the way some people like fat Dan are bleating is way over the top.

I loved how Wayne at times had a different opinion, giving Tim rounds where Benny wasn't and it was stumping him.

jimcook wrote:i think the commentary and use of compubox on these programmes is shite. i watched the mayweather cotto fight and if you listened to the commentary (steward included) they were so far up mayweathers arse you would think that the fight was one way traffic. at the end of a fairly close fight mayweathers face was quite bashed up (for him) , but if you followed the tv team then it was all floyd, floyds this floyds that floyds the greatest of all time etc. the reality was he won a fairly close fight.
the same applies to last night. manny this , manny that . in fact he landed some big lefts , and he fought the last minute of each round. if it was such a dominant performance why is bradley not all bashed up? he hardly had a mark on his face...and this after 12 supposed one sided rounds of a beating at the hands of manny huge poower punching pac.
all you people who think its such a farce should go and watch the fight again with the sound turned off and im sure you will see the fight differently. im not saying bradley won, but these tv teams really talk so much shite and twist the events of the fight to suit their own lazy perceptions, as well as keeping the party line. plus what is compubox? is it a higher intelligence that informs us of the reality of a fight? is it omniscient? or is it just a useless gimmick for thick viewers and tv presenters to follow like sheep?
to all you who said you wont watch boxing again......you will, you know you will, but next time turn the shitey commentary off .

jimcook wrote:i think the commentary and use of compubox on these programmes is shite. i watched the mayweather cotto fight and if you listened to the commentary (steward included) they were so far up mayweathers arse you would think that the fight was one way traffic. at the end of a fairly close fight mayweathers face was quite bashed up (for him) , but if you followed the tv team then it was all floyd, floyds this floyds that floyds the greatest of all time etc. the reality was he won a fairly close fight.
the same applies to last night. manny this , manny that . in fact he landed some big lefts , and he fought the last minute of each round. if it was such a dominant performance why is bradley not all bashed up? he hardly had a mark on his face...and this after 12 supposed one sided rounds of a beating at the hands of manny huge poower punching pac.
all you people who think its such a farce should go and watch the fight again with the sound turned off and im sure you will see the fight differently. im not saying bradley won, but these tv teams really talk so much shite and twist the events of the fight to suit their own lazy perceptions, as well as keeping the party line. plus what is compubox? is it a higher intelligence that informs us of the reality of a fight? is it omniscient? or is it just a useless gimmick for thick viewers and tv presenters to follow like sheep?
to all you who said you wont watch boxing again......you will, you know you will, but next time turn the shitey commentary off .

rapid2 wrote:Robberies are part of boxing. Ask Marquez.

Just have a rematch.

earsjohn wrote:Wouldn't have happened under the LBF!

In all the BS, I have to say that both Bradley and Manny were pure class in the interviews. Bradley didn't claim a comfortable win, Manny didn't scream robbery - can think of 90% of fighters who would not have covered themselves in glory under the same circumstances.

Old bones Ian wrote:I gave Bradley rounds 3,7,10,11,12