Manny Pacquiao Vs. Timothy Bradley Media Scorecards...

Who cares

JMM got robbed 2 times against Pacquiao, and Mayweather 10-2d him.

 

And what did Bradley ending up with the win serve justice in any way? How was Bradley deserving of getting a gift on base that Marquez should have gotten 1 (in my opinion) win over Pac?

Just make this example for instance... You have a winning lottery ticket with life changing money.
It gets stolen from your home and the robber cashes it in, becoming filthy rich. Then he gets robbed by some white collar criminal on a fraudulent investment deal. How does that help you, and how is that somehow making things right?

 

Media scorecards for jmm Pac was split. Media scorecards for Pac Bradley is 90-10. One is a robbery the other is a close fight.

 

Of course some insecure schmuck would post this.

Go take a look at the media cards for the Marquez fights, then look at the Bradley one. The Bradley fight was awful, not even close. The Marquez fights were close, Juan was knocked down and that made the difference.

 

Yeah he won that fight ...ugly robbery.

Was hard to be pissed off about it though. PacMan fought 30 seconds of each round as was sloppier than he'd ever been in his career that night. Just missing wild punches and falling around off balance.

That was the height of his bogus "Christianity" and turning his back on the Catholic church. He had this ******ed idea that he would do just enough to win a fight without actually hurting anyone.

Roidquez blasted his head off his f***ing shoulders after that and it kinda got his mind right during the homestretch of his career.

 

Wow, Brian Kenny gave it to Bradley. That fight was so one-sided for Pacquiao that I literally fell asleep twice.

 

It was not that one-sided. To this day Bradley's performance in that first fight is vastly underrated and underappreciated. Did Bradley do enough to win ? I'm not making that claim, but he fought a very disciplined and tactically sound fight.

I admit that when I first watched it was convinced that Pacquiao won clearly, but then I watched it again with the volume off and paid more attention to what Bradley was landing and I realized it was much closer than I initially thought. This was at the height of Pacquiao's popularity and HBO was riding Pacquiao to the moon, so it was no surprise that it was seen as a robbery.

The thing about it was Bradley didn't really land that many earth shattering punches, he landed a few but Pacquiao was constantly moving and never really gave the impression that he was really bothered by what Bradley was landing. Still Bradley was landing, most were only grazing Pacquiao or hitting his arms, but they were hits. In the majority of the rounds, Pacquiao wasn't really opening up on Bradley. I need to watch it again, but Bradley came in there with a gameplan and executed it well enough.

This is a fight where fans still exaggerate how one-sided it was. It really wasn't. Whoever you thought won, Bradley deserves more credit for how well he fought that night, and frankly it bothers me how getting this decision affected Bradley's career. Bradley said many times that all the negativity surrounding the decision and robbery claims put him in a very dark place, it affected his preparation for the rematch and I think it's clear that it changed the way he fought. He became less of a tactician as a result and more of a fan friendly fighter. The war with Ruslan Provodnikov where he dug down deep to get that win was memorable, but it also took a lot out of Bradley.

By the time he rematched Pacquiao he wasn't the same disciplined fighter he was when he outpointed Pacquiao the first time, he didn't have that confidence that he could shock the world like he had before the first fight with Pacquiao, everybody was so mad at the "robbery" of the first fight Bradley really had no chance to ebat Pacqauio the 2nd time, and the 3rd fight ended his career.

Bradley deserved better. He beat Pacquiao, not clearly, not in the vast majority's eyes, but he fought a smart fight that night and I don't think Pacquiao was well prepared to handle Bradley's style to the extent that many believe he did. He didn't deserve to have his life turned upside down and told that he didn't deserve that win. Nothing wrong with thinking Pacquiao beat him that night, hell I did, but you can't deny how influential the HBO telecast was to the public believing that. Too many close rounds were just assumed to be won by Pacquiao. Really many of those rounds are debatable. Fans are too influenced by fighter popularity and unofficial scorers. Bradley fought well, and deserves more credit for that performance.

 

The way Arum kept Bradley away from Showtime fighters was bad for Pac's/Bradley's legacy

 

Was no robbery. It was a close competitive fight. It was classic to see all the Pac tards butt sore for months. I had Bradley winning when I rewatched it, but thought it could go either way. It was a closer fight than when Marquez got robbed in the second and third Pac fights.