Bradley/Holt could have been a draw.

I think you are way overvaluing headshots vs. bodyshots my man, especially in this fight, where what needed to be done was "whatever works to win." Look back at boxing historically and see how important bodywork really is. There is a reason that Ali said (paraphrasing): "The shots to the head look good on tv, but the shots you take to the body are the ones you still feel a week later." There is a reason behind the cliche about bodypunching "putting rounds in the bank." There is a reason behind the saying "Kill the body and the head will die." Bodypunching is underrated by far, far too many people, especially people who recently started watching boxing, and it just makes me shake my head.

Effective body punching is one of the great nuances of boxing, and frankly, one of the more entertaining facets of the sport. Its sad that some people dont take it as seriously as it deserves to be taken.

 

Answer my question. Besides the good bodywork in some rounds, what was Bradley doing to overcome the effective counter punching Kendall was doing in every round? Just because Kendall wasn't landing 20 effective counter shots a round doesn't mean he was losing those rounds.

 

First off Holt should of beat Bradley. Hold abandoned his jab which played a major factor every time he threw it. Holt being the stronger puncher should of apply pressure at Bradley not the other way around. I give my props to Bradley for hanging in their and keeping his cool and rallying back from that knockdown in the first to win this fight. Bradley speed and his work rate was too much for Holt even though I think Holt could of done a better job. Bradley won the fight hands down even though he got knock down twice and there's no way this fight was a draw or a Holt win !!!!

 

Holt fought like an old man there. When he would land, he would land like 3 punches a round.

 

So, basically what you are saying is that Bradley's body punching was better than Holt's two KD's, Holt's jab, and Holt's power punches landed? Sorry man, I just ain't buying it. He had a couple of rounds where his bodywork was good and in the others it was either non-existent or marginal at best. He had a decent night of body punching, nothing more.

 

Holt fought a very tactiful fight.

 

ineffective aggressiveness wins fight according to a Calzahge fan...not surprise.

 

And it was obvious that Holt took 2 rounds off. I think 5 and 6

 

Punch for punch, yeah, Holt was the better man, but Bradley's work was not ineffective, not even close. He put Holt into a shell and landed clean plenty of times. He was in control for 9 of the 12 rounds.

Again, punch for punch Holt was better, but when Bradley is landing about 10-1, that doesn't matter.

 

any good counterpuncher with a good punch would beat the **** out of bradley, he needs to set his punches better and time them. I don't know about his chin though. Back on topic, bradley won this fight, i dont know wtf was holt doing in there, i thought he was pumped up with all the **** talking he did before the bell but he didnt do ****

 

You really believe Bradley was landing 10-1??? I mean, really?:huh

 

i think holt is the better man, but **** he didnt do much and i wanted him to win. The power was there, he can catch or he could have knock bradley out if he wanted to but he look like a lazy ass ***** in that ring.

 

It's an exaggeration.

The point was that it doesn't matter that Holt's one punch was better than Bradley's one punch when it was rather obvious as to who was doing more in most of the rounds, and that was Bradley.

 

^^^^^
Change your name :twisted: