There is always this debate about pacquiao being robbed in the first bradley fight. I do indeed think the fight was closer than people have it, but that pacquiao won it 7-5. That being said, I also feel pacquiao lost the marquez 3 fight as well. What do you all think about it, and if true, why did pacquiao not get any stick for it like bradley did?
:roflatsch Maybe most Pac fans, JMM won that fight 8 to 4, and i scored it again giving everything possible to Pac and still came out at 7 5 JMM. I would not call it robbery per say but not one of judges had JMM winning :tired carefully picked judges for sure!!!
The educated boxing media told it like it was, blatant robbery, now the mainstream media who normally does'nt cover boxing, though it was plain to see Pacquiao was gifted, were silent about it because simply their there to root on a bigger event to come, Mayweather vs Pacquiao. Mainstream media normally sides with the fighter being hyped, its that simple.
it was a robbery per se because NOT on true boxing fan could possibly have paq winning. i think it was just as bad as paq v bradley. they were both robberies because the clearly superior winning fighter did not get the dec
I dunno why people gotta defend their fighters all the time Im a Berto fan had him losing to Ortiz Had Matthysse losing to Garcia Everyone loses why defend you're fighter when you know he lost Marquez won and it wasnt close
if so, how come all we hear about is the Bradley's backlash ? Or do the pacquiao fans employ double standards?
dummy the pac vs jmm 3 fight was very close it was nothing like the pac vs bradley fight tim didnt even win one round:deal
Hell no perfectly scored fight, if you want to talk about robbery look no further than the first fight where an incompetent judge who made a scoring mistake that prevented Pac from getting the decision. i had the fights 3-1 in Pac's favor and i have an asterisk next to Roidquez win cause hes clear as day that he was juiced to his eyeballs.