Marquez and the Golpe A Golpe team analyze Pacquiao-Bradley: "He looked Spectacular"

The original video can be found below; the commentary from the broadcast team starts at 1:20 :

http://espndeportes.espn.go.com/videohub/video/clipDeportes?id=1542345&cc=3888

Enjoy.

----

Announcer Dude: Thanks very much, here we are; first the bulls, Jorge Eduardo Sanchez and Juan Manuel Marquez (along with analyst David Faitelson), ready to analyze what occurred tonight in Las Vegas, Nevada; a victory on the part of Tim Bradley over Manny Pacquiao. You guys have commented already, still in a state of shock, having him lose his world title in an incomprehensible manner. They talk of Karma, but this doesn’t serve professional boxing; another lamentable blow to the credibility of boxing . Today, Manny Pacquiao did great work gentlemen.

JMM: Yes, he did great work. I saw him win by 4 points. He looked really good, he looked spectacular. We’d already said that he lost the hunger for the victory; now he demonstrated that he wants to the victory, that he wanted to show that he was the Manny Pacquiao from 2, 3 years ago, and he showed it very well, and I don’t know what fight they saw.

Faitelson: Incredible; second time in a Pacquiao fight, of a high level in Las Vegas, where the people come out screaming “Robbery! Robbery! Robbery!” People came out infuriated; and that had nothing to do with the spectacle we saw in the ring, I thought it was a good fight. Bradley, with his limitations, showed speed, showed determination, he had will, he had hopes, but it seemed to me that today, Pacquiao dominated the fight, and I thought he won the fight; they robbed Pacquiao. That’s news-that they robbed Pacquiao. Jorge Eduardo, we’ve said that it was impossible for Pacquiao to lose via the judges. Today, the judges “knocked out” Manny Pacquiao.

Announcer Dude: Yes, a real blow to the head of Manny Pacquiao. Last night, we’d discussed on Golpe A Golpe that the fact that Pacquiao had developed a better boxing ability, having beaten all authentically in the world of professional boxing, after the poor exhibition against Juan Manuel Marquez this past November, as well as the great exhibition of the Mexican against Pacquiao this past November. Here we knew that the pressure existed for Manny Pacquiao, and that the pressure also existed for the judges, since it as a lamentable decision. But when you make a mistake twice, the second time existing to compensate the first, well, it’s regrettable, David; we go from error to error. What does boxing need, friends, to gain a sense of transparency and credibility to everything that happens in the ring?

JMM: Listen Jorge, it can’t be-I can’t believe- that the judges now want to vindicate themselves from the decision of this past November, by giving that result for Manny Pacquiao, who I saw win the fight by 4 rounds-they can’t vindicate themselves that way, and once again possibly affect Pacquiao’s career and favor Timothy Bradley, who gave a great fight, but not one that won it.

Announcer Dude: Boxistically, what happened in the ring?

Faitelson: I think that boxing is really a sport of styles. Whoever establishes conditions in the ring is the one who should win the fight. And the style of Manny Pacquiao prevailed, which ran into some trouble in the early rounds against the speed we knew Bradley had, but if Bradley had the advantage of speed, Pacquiao countered that with the greater potency (power), and for many moments, he became the great Pacquiao of history once again, one has to recognize it. Pacquiao was the dominant force in this fight, I have no doubt of that. On two occasions, he had Bradley on the edge of a knockout. I ask how a modern day champion like Bradley without a punch can be champion at 147 lbs; what is that?

Announcer Dude: Pacquiao now gains credibility after what we observed in November, but boxing still loses all the same. Here, the big question is: what’s going to happen with Juan Manuel Marquez? He’s practically out of the game because the rematch is sure to follow?

JMM: Yes, the rematch will come. As always, the contract was signed, and in this case, if Manny Pacquiao lost, he would get a rematch; he lost, and so I think the rematch will come in November. I end up on the outside, but well, it’s a great mistake on the part of the judges; they may want to correct the mistake they made months before, but I’ll keep training, I’ll keep going forward with my career, and depending on how things happen, I’ll see what my future is.

Faitelson: Not only does this ruin something that Juan Manuel won himself inside the ring; it also ruins the fight that the industry wanted to see between Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao. This means that this fight can be years away, or we may never see it due to the interests that revolve around boxing. There is an urgency to change the way things work in order to define who wins fight. It can’t be that people keep coming out of the arena screaming robbery, when we saw a good sporting event inside the ring!

Announcer Dude: And the real problem is that we start to become accustomed to it. Unfortunately, during the big events in Las Vegas, we start to get used to the bad failings and the terrible failings of injustices, including the case in which the most powerful man in professional boxing just felt them, the case of Manny Pacquiao. A great night of boxing, and a great victory for Randal Bailey against Mike Jones, with the power of a welterweight punch and a tremendous knockout; and regrettably, a horrible ending for the fight of Tim Bradley against Manny Pacquiao-completely undeserved.

 

He has slowed down but his legs looked good, which was my primary concern. He was able to bounce in and out practically at well, as well as bend his waist to avoid Bradley's counters. Above all, Pacquiao impressed me with his boxing ability in that fight against an almost equally fast fighter.

 

You are in the small minority that thinks Bradley won the fight. Stop talking as if you're some sort of authority on boxing when Bradley got soundly beaten in the eyes of most, even those that had Marquez beat Pacquiao. He did not win 7 rounds, no way. There's a reason an entire newscast team of Mexicans condemn the decision as a robbery.

The right hook as a counter didn't really land because Bradley's jab wasn't really there. Pacquiao was actually the one jabbing more authoritatively, and was slipping his left in the pocket by his chin left every time Bradley did try to jab (a trick he used well against Cotto). His right hook didn't appear often, but Roach's "baby" (the jab/hook hybrid he taught Khan and Pac) was there in combination and as a single shot thrown when Manny ducked low and popped it in. Bradley moved well and avoided a good deal of punches, but Pac's lead foot was on the outside most of the night, and without the angle for that overhand right he loves to launch, Bradley was virtually lost, while Manny opened up avenues for his punches consistently.

 

I see what you're saying but Bradley didn't make it easy in there to simply tee off; Pacquiao wanted to look good and avoid counters, and thus, didn't beast out as he might have a few years ago.