It's funny how one of the judge said he gave Pacquiao the first 6 rounds but Bradley took over the second half...but his scored card read 7-5 for Bradley. He also said he scored for Bradley because the old Pac would have finished Bradley when Bradley was hurt, where the current Pac couldn't do that .
51 boxing writers....48 thought pacquiao won, 3 thought bradley won. only 1 in 10 of the viewing public thought bradley won. if you also scored it for bradley, you seriously need to re-analyze how you score fights.
not really. Pac only won 5 rounds clearly. and bradley 1. So therefore technacly, it isn't incorrect scoring it for Bradley. The boxing scoring system is flawed.
The media reaction is perhaps the most overwhelming in history. The only one that comes anything near to competing is Sharkey-Schmeling. For people in the stadium, it's a no-brainer.
Well if Bradley doesn't get hurt or knock down in a round then I suggest they think Bradley won that round.
I watched it twice, the first on HBO with sound. I scored it 119-109 Pacquiao the second time i watched with no sound. I scored it 116-112. The first time i was influenced by Lampley but nevertheless it was still a Pacquiao solid victory. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a Pacquiao hater or stupid.
117-111 the first time,116-112 the second time. I chanced the sound both times... I do think it was a little more up for question for people watching on TV. But for the guys who were ringside - the guy smost immune to Lampley I would guess - have it almost universally for Bradley. That shouldn't be ignored, certainly not in favour of a handful of TV scorecards.