What was behind the Pacquiao - Bradley decision?

Bob Arum keeping all the money in house.

 

Bradley taxed that *ss...

 

Yup true , and thats why Brook and hearn turned down Bradley, until Brook gets a belt and can bargain on even terms

 

This pretty much:

This content is protected

 

I thought it was closer than the announcers and all the other ESB posters did. But I did think Pac won the close bout. I would say the answer to this question is incompetent judging but I'll chart it down to honest mistake.

 

arum at his best

 

It is obvious to me that they are all in on it. Arum trying to keep an undefeated black american in his stable.

 

Honestly i put it down to the below two points:

*Pac mande the judges wait for him to enter the ring because he wanted to see the end of the big game..... Very rude.

*Many (including me) felt Pac lost to Marquez in the last outing. probably including the judges. Possibly some revenge judging







*

 

I remember watching the fight and I thought bradley won 1st couple rounds,I can honestly say the announcers had me rethinking myself,with that said I think it was a close fight that could of gone either way.

 

Bradley set that **** up on his own.

 

illuminati were in on it

 

I have no problem with a card 7 rounds to 5, either way. I see Manny missing so much more than the TV announcers did when I watch the fight. Tim made Manny miss an awful lot...

 

One of the two:

• Arum trying to secure and justify another in-house fight for Pac. Not many opponents availabe -- only JMM -- and so there needs to be a reason for Bradley to be used again.
• Like Mrtibbs has said, the judges probably felt less comfortable giving Pacquiao rounds considering what happened the fight before, and ended up overcompensating Bradley's work.

I'm strongly leaning towards the former.