Robbery is taking it a bit too far...

Yup. That kind of scoring is embarrassing. Lots of it in the GF. Mass fanboy opinion run amok.

 

I originally missed the fight but watched it on youtube earlier today (british commentary).
To be honest, I don't know what all the fuss is about...
What I did realize however, is how biased the british commentary was, it was a shame really, and I expect the american commentary to have been the same if not worse from what I heard in this forum.
I tried to be as impartial as I could, and I scored it 115-114 for Bradley.
It was a really close fight, there were about 3 rounds that could have gone either way, I think I scored 1 for Pac, 1 for Bradley, and 1 even. Bradley took the first two, Pac took the majority of the middle rounds, Bradley dominated the finish.
I had it even going into the last round, and in my opinion Bradley did enough to win it and therefore the fight.
The fight couldve gone either way, but I think a victory for Bradley is absolutely not outrageous, and definitely not a robbery.
Pacquiao was steadily declining in his last fights, it kinda hurts to see him miss so many shots and land almost no meaningful combinations.
He doesnt have the accuracy, stamina, coordination, footwork or power from the old days, and he has gotten a good bit slower overall, too.
These days he almost looks like just a wild brawler lacking the most basic boxing-skills and balance, not like the p4p-king who annihilated naturally bigger world-caliber-fighters and made it look easy.
Vs Mosley we saw that Pac had declined significantly, vs Marquez we saw that something was very very wrong with him, vs Bradley we saw that Pacquiao is plain shot.
Any elite fighter at 140 and above now has a very realisitic chance of beating him.
I hope the Pacman hangs em up for good now, I dont have to see a rematch, I cant imagine Pac doing any better than saturday, probably it would be worse and I dont want to see a legend like Pac getting knocked out by a fighter he wouldve eaten alive in his prime. I want to remember the Manny Pacquiao from the Morales-, Barrera-, Diaz-, Cotto-, ODLH-, Hatton-, and the first two Marquez-fights.
Manny Pacquiao is a legend and one of the absolute best fighters ever, but now is the time to call it a day imo.
Please dont drag the corpse of Manny into the ring with Floyd Mayweather, what once was the biggest fight imaginable now doesnt make make any more sense at all.

 

And by god give Bradley some respect for a big performance and a great victory!

 

While I dont agree with absolutley everything here , this story is as old as boxing is

When you have a fighter who relies on a physical attribute(s) as they age they can come a cropper very very quickly

Dempsey , Frazier , Tyson , Hatton , Witter , Joner Jnr , Naseem etc etc etc.

pac aint quite shot but I agree any quality fighter who turns up in shape , and ready to give it all has a decent chance.

 

Erm... no. He gets respect for being durable enough and going for it... but not for "a great victory", because well...erm... he didn't win. atsch

P.S. I'm not blaming Bradley - it's not his fault (but he did lose.. easily).

 

48 out of 51 boxing scribes had Manny won an average of 10-2. So you saying you're better then them? ****ing idiot. atsch

 

Personally, I find a 11-1 or 10-2 scorecard in favour of pacquiao much more outrageous and comical than a 7-5 for Bradley.
The way I see it, it was a very competitive and extremely close fight, that couldve gone either way.
What kind of fight anybody else saw I dont know, but it should be noted that biased commentary and personal preferences can surely have a significant effect on your perception.

 

It was 9-3 for Manny in my oppinion - a clear cut robbery. I don't care to see a rematch, in fact, boxing can go screw itself in my book. At least for a while.

 

No, it's not. . .

I would find it a little less comical if Cotto won the decision over the FLoyd, than what happened Saturday night in Las Vegas, Nevada on June 9th, 2012. . . .

 

Everybody here thinks they are better at scoring fights than the actual judges, so where exactly is the difference?

 

Nah kid....nothing at all was close in this fight. It was just like Abril or Campiello getting robbed. Actually in this fight between Tim and PAC....PAC was more accurate and landing at a higher connect percentage. Their work rate was pretty much on level with one another.

In EVERY area PAC dominated......Rios had a higher work rate than Abril even though Abril was clearly landing at a higher connect percentage and was more accurate.

Anyone who gave the fight to Tim....or thought it was "reasonably close" either hate PAC...Incredibly passionate Floyd fanatics, blind or border line ******ed. Being all 4 is possible but highly unlikely.....hey... I'm a realist.:yep

PAC vs JMM 3 was a close fight....The wrong guy won IN MY OPINION! But in close fights the outcome a lot of the time is subjective. A lot of judges LIKE pressure...the guy who throws more...takes the fight to their opponent.... Some like the more efficent, more accurate boxer who picks his shots. And those conflicting styles do produce close contraversial fights a lot of the time. JLC vs Mayweather is a good example along with the Rubber match between JMM and PAC.

But Tim wasn't in this fight AT ALL! Anyone who tries to say otherwise isn't taken seriously at all.....there has to be an agenda or the person is mentally and/or physically impaired. And for those folks.... you have my sympathy.

 

I rank this slightly below WHitaker/Chavez, above Campillo Cloud, and about on par with Lewis/Holyfield, or Rios/Abril.

 

Work rate....meaning a Jab that was constant but not landing. Tim failed to open up more because he didn't want to be caught.. I understand that...no one wants to be KO'd but Tim shouldn't have said he would fight one way and go into survival mode knowing that he was losing the fight.

 

All robberies.... ALL BIG fights aside from Rios/Abril. The bigger the fight, the more impact these robberies have on the sport.