Yes, I agree that the fight was a robbery as I had voted in the thread's poll site. But it for damn sure was not the biggest of all robberies in boxing history as most of Pacquiao's fans would have you belive otherwise. Especially most of the nuthuggers at ESPN. Joe Louis vs Jersey Joe Walcott 1 Ray Leonard vs Tommy Hearns 2 Michael Spinks vs Larry Holmes 2 Acelino "Popo" Freitas vs Joel Cassamayor Joel Cassamayor vs Santo Maria Cruz Eric Morales vs Marco Antonio Barrera 1 Paule Ayala vs Johnny Tapia 1 & 2 Montell Griffin vs James Toney 1 & 2 Michael Dokes vs Mike Weaver 2 Shane Mosely vs Oscar De Lahoya 2 Felix Trinidad vs Oscar De Lahoya 2 Alfredo Escalera vs Tyrone Everett Just to name a few, were all fights that were more controversial than the Bradley-Pacquaio fight.
I disagree with some of those: Morales MAB, Mosley DLH 2, Freitas Castillo weren't as wide at least. I barely remember Ayala Tapia, didn't think it was that one sided. Cause man, this one was super one sided in consensus opinion. Only one that beats it clear was Casamayor Santa Cruz http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Manny_Pacquiao_vs._Timothy_Bradley
Look at this juantard "Among the experts above, 121 scored the bout for Pacquiao, 1 scored the bout a draw, and 1 scored the bout for Bradley." http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Manny_Pacquiao_vs._Timothy_Bradley Were they listening to the boxing commentary? That's what I thought :hi:.
One sentence can not be any clearer. "Among the experts above, 121 scored the bout for Pacquiao, 1 scored the bout a draw, and 1 scored the bout for Bradley." Can you see this, ho? Is this clear to ya?
That was a robbery. Bradley knows it was too, you can instantly tell by his less than convincing replies when he's questioned about it.
:nod "Oh, but all the media experts!!!" ...yes, all the media experts and the fans got roundly sucked into the HBO commentary and the folly of giving the aggressor the benefit of the doubt while ignoring what actually landed cleanly and what good work the non-aggressor was doing with jabs and body shots in several rounds. 115-113 Pacquiao is my score, and I can accept wider as far as maybe 117-111. Anything from 118-110 on is bull****, even more so than a draw or Bradley W. (which, for the record, are not acceptable scores either IMO)
Yes. There seems to be a widespread consensus that a close fight can't be considered a robbery, but there's no objective way you could have had Bradley winning the fight, so whether u scored it 7-5 (closest possible scorecard without KD's point deductions, or a draw) it still couldn't have possibly gone to Bradley That being said, 31 - 0 bitches
:good People act like this is a black and white issue, like there are two camps and you're either in this or that one. Not so. There are the wackos saying Bradley took it. There are the wackos on the other end saying Pacquiao deserved it by an eight-point margin or more. Then you have the slight wackos saying maybe Bradley could've nicked a draw. Then you have the slight wackos on the other end saying Pacquiao deserved it by a four or six point margin. Then you have reasonable people who know boxing and scored it 115-113 Pacquiao. The first two groups of full-blown wackos are so far apart in different corners of La-La Land that they believe you're either with them or against them, and lump the moderates in with the opposition when, really, the moderates are equally opposed to those other extremists.
IMO Marquez deserved the entire trilogy, even more clearly in each case than Pacquiao deserved the nod over Bradley. III > II > I > Pacquiao-Bradley, as far as magnitude of shitty verdicts go.
That being the case, PAC fans should zip it. Didn't hear them cry about the JMM3 fight..... Santa (uncle bob) only gives gifts to those who have been " good". Pacquiao got his and no one complained...... Let lil Timmy enjoy his.