Was Pacquaio-Bradley really a robbery?

See I have to watch it again now because this is how the majority can sometimes be deceived. By forming an overall judgement about who won without taking into account that all the rounds hold equal weight. I've noted this is especially true when one boxer pockets the early or the late rounds. In other words, it's easy to form an opinion after 8 or 9 rounds and then sort of tune out, or to let slip from memory the early work if that fighter then goes on to lose the majority of the remaining rounds. Hope that makes sense. :thumbsup

 

Gigantic robbery in my view, i could give Bradley 2 maybe 3 rounds... anything more is just beyond reality.

 

Close fight when I watched it. Was leaning towards Pac. After rewatching it a couple times, I had it for Bradley. After video analyzing it round by round, I had it for Bradley also.

A whole lot of people drinking that Pacman koolaid, to consider that fight a robbery.

 

I feel that it was a reasonably close fight that Manny Pac clearly won.

 

Pac won every round? You even watch the fight? There were rounds where Pac did next to nothing, especially the later rounds when Bradley was landing on Pac's body. The fight was close, real close. I had it a draw or a 1 round victory for Pac. No one knew Bradley when the firs fight happened. PAc got the benefit of the doubt for every exchange and Manny Steward was constantly talking about Bradley having no power. Bradley will win again next week.

 

No one knew Bradley? he was only the undefeated unified Lww champ, p4p ranked and a trendy pick vs Pac. No wonder your score is so far fringe

 

Plenty of utter buffoonery/trolling in this thread. Clear win for the congressman.

 

Yes but close but clear. That needs keeping in perspective.

Wide cards for Pacquiao are just as bad as cards for Bradley.

Pacquiao didn't take nine rounds (let alone ten or eleven) any more than Bradley took six.

 

So how come 9-3 was the average score with the press?

 

I'm completely on the fence with the Pacquiao/ Mayweather debate as both their fanboys are annoying as **** but scoring the fight for Bradley is as bad as scoring the Mayweather/Cotto fight for Cotto- if not worse.

 

:conf How come most folks as of the Scopes trial just 89 years years ago were adamant in believing evolution was some ****amamie sacrilege that shouldn't be taught in schools?

The majority are often wrong.

9-3 is a bad score, actually worse than a draw. If you disagree explain which two of the following absolutely weren't Bradley's: 1st, 8th, 10th, 11th, 12th.

 

Yes, that is true. You can't find seven Bradley rounds even if you are trying very hard. The only possible ones you can give him are 1, 8, and the championship sweep (all five of which he did earn, some of them close but still clear) and possibly also the seventh. The 2nd-6th and 9th are off limits, 100% Pacquiao's. Therefore you can't reasonably arrive upon the pair of 115-113 cards that gave Bradley the MD. Absolute worst case for Pacquiao is a draw since he bested six very clearly...plus maybe the seventh, a bit less clearly.

...however...calling it a shutout or even within three rounds of a shutout for Pacquiao is every bit a wrong as scoring it for Bradley.

115-113 Pacquiao is correct. 116-112 is a little generous to him. A 114-114 draw is generous to Bradley (and requires giving him the contentious 7th). 117-111 Pacquiao is pushing it. 118-110, 119-109, and 120-108 Pacquiao are just as ridiculous as 115-113 Bradley.

 

Cards for Tim were a disgrace....wide cards for Manny were prevalent based on the way things unfolded in the ring. PAC won on my card by 4 rounds and I was being extremely generous to Tim who didn't do much of anything. He definitely did not inflict more damage.....Tim was out worked and the worse for wear. The punch stats heavily favored Manny except in the Jab category. Floyd Sr., Roger & Jeff had wider cards favoring PAC than me....again....I was being generous in giving Tim rounds but most who saw that fight found it very difficult to find rounds to give to Tim becuase he just didn't do much that fight.

 

I agree that no way it was a shut out. However I think in the championship rounds Pacquiao (quite rightly IMO) thought he'd already done enough to win and took his foot off the pedal.

 

Absolutely werent? So that's how you got your score, you automatically scored any round to Tim that wasn't crystal clear for Pac. Makes sense.

Bud boxing scoring is nothing like evolution. It's not a science, there's no underlying fact. In science you can have 100 guys wrong and 1 right. In boxing if 100 saw it one way, 1 saw it another, the 100 are right. So you think 100 years from now people will be like "with what we know now, Bradley really beat Pac that time everyone thought robbery"?