Who Won Pac-Bradley? Post fight discussion STOP MAKING NEW THREADS ABOUT THIS FIGHT.

[Flawless*]

where are the CREDIBLE boxing afficionados who had bradley winning?

pac vs bradley fight

Barry Tompkins, Showtime: 119-110 Pacquiao
Harold Lederman, HBO: 119-109 Pacquiao
Ray Markarian, The Sweet Science: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Marley, Examiner: 119-109 Pacquiao
Dan Rafael, ESPN: 119-109 Pacquiao
Vittorio Tafur, San Francisco Chronicle: 119-109 Pacquiao
Michael Woods, The Sweet Science: 119-109 Pacquiao
Ramon Aranda, 3 More Rounds: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mario Cabrera, Boxing Republic: 118-110 Pacquiao
Nigel Collins, ESPN: 118-110 Pacquiao
Mike Coppinger, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ace Freeman, Fight Fan: 118-110 Pacquiao
Rich Marotta, KFI Los Angeles: 118-110 Pacquiao
Kelsey McCarson, The Sweet Science: 118-110 Pacquiao
Gabriel Montoya, MaxBoxing: 118-110 Pacquiao
Pete O’Brien, USA Today: 118-110 Pacquiao
Eric Raskin, Grantland: 118-110 Pacquiao
Michael Rosenthal, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Colin Seymour, Examiner: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ryan ********, Ring Magazine: 118-110 Pacquiao
Ryan Burton, Boxing Scene: 117-112 Pacquiao
Scott Christ, Bad Left Hook: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Dahlberg, Associated Press: 117-111 Pacquiao
Gareth Davies, London Daily Telegraph: 117-111 Pacquiao
Doug Fischer, Ring Magazine: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Greisman, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jorge Hernandez, The Low Blow: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kevin Iole, Yahoo! Sports: 117-111 Pacquiao
Robert Littal, Black Sports Online: 117-111 Pacquiao
Steve Kim, Max Boxing: 117-111 Pacquiao
Ryan Maquiñana, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
David Mayo, MLive: 117-111 Pacquiao
Kieran Mulvaney, HBO: 117-111 Pacquiao
Lance Pugmire, Los Angeles Times: 117-111 Pacquiao
Chris Robinson, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Cliff Rold, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Champ Ross, Da Truth Boxing: 117-111 Pacquiao
Luis Sandoval, Boxing Scene: 117-111 Pacquiao
Jonathan Sakti, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Tim Starks, Queensberry Rules: 117-111 Pacquiao
Richie Tomassini, Comcast SportsNet Bay Area: 117-111 Pacquiao
Darren Velasco, 8 Count News: 117-111 Pacquiao
Rick Reeno, Boxing Scene: 116-112 Pacquiao
George Willis, New York Post: 116-112 Pacquiao
Steve Zemach, Queensberry Rules: 116-112 Pacquiao
Armando Alvarez, Telemundo: 115-113 Pacquiao
Jake Donovan, Boxing Scene: 115-113 Pacquiao
Lem Satterfield, Ring Magazine: 115-113 Pacquiao
Fox Sports: 109-119 Manny Pacquiao
Los Angeles Times: 117-111 Manny Pacquiao
Guardian UK: 117-111 Manny Pacquiao
ESPN (Dan Rafael): 119-109 Manny Pacquiao
HBO (Harold Lederman): 119-109 Manny Pacquiao
Fighthype.com: 116-112 Manny Pacquiao
East Side Boxing: 118-110 Manny Pacquiao
The Associated Press: 117-111 Manny Pacquiao
Yahoo! Sports: 117-111 Manny Pacquiao
Daily Telegraph: 117-111 Manny Pacquiao
Primetime: 116-112 Manny Pacquiao
ESPN (Michael Woods): 119-109 Manny Pacquiao
 

Watching bias HBO coverage certainly shaped the mind and decisions of thousands. Trust me, when the hype dies down, many will rewatch the fight and claim Bradley won. This always happen, just ride the tide wave for now,

[check hook]

Nevada state athletic commission refuses to launch an investigation.

"Every fighter who loses a close fight like that wants to look at the judges." - Keith Kizer

Close fight??? Really now...... If you aren't willing to deal with the problems, maybe you are part of it... These judges are getting off Scott free with nothing but the ire of boxing fans.. Maybe that is enough, but if nobody does anything about these obviously erroneous decisions, this will keep happening.. This is more than a black eye to boxing.. Boxing is a joke and its credibility has taken a huge hit... Keith better do something lest he be part of it himself..

Well i thought it was close. iv'e only watched it the once though.

[check hook]

thats said i don't remember Bradley doing winning any of rds 4,5,6,7,8 and 9. When the first card was read 115-113 in favour of Pac i thought that was about right and honestly i was expecting the other two judges to have it thereabouts.

[LBJ2010]

Duane Ford and Jerry Roth explain their decisions

Duane Ford, who had it 115-113 Bradley:

"You've got to put the ball in the basket and Manny didn't put the ball in the basket enough. ... This isn't American Idol. If I judge for the people, I shouldn't be a judge. I went in with a clear mind and judged each round. ... I don't look at the punch stats but I saw Manny miss a lot of punches and Bradley hit Manny and win a lot of the exchanges. ... I'm comfortable with my performance. I thought Bradley gave Pacquiao a boxing lesson."

Jerry Roth, who had it 115-113 Pac

"I'm looking for effective aggressiveness. I thought Pacquiao won a lot of the early rounds, and I thought Bradley came on in the end. That's why I gave Bradley the last three rounds. But I still thought Pacquiao had done enough to win."

looks like the main reasoning for the decision is that Pac was more active, but they felt he was wild and missing, while Bradley was boxing and more effective

[boxingfeind]

Arum wants an investigation of the judges

Pacquiao-Bradley rematch on hold, Arum wants an investigation of the judges




By Chris Williams: In what may be little more than posturing by Top Rank promoter Bob Arum, he wants the two judges that scored the fight for Timothy Bradley over his cash cow fighter WBO welterweight champion Manny Pacquiao to be investigated.

This in turn leaves the proposed November 10th rematch between Pacquiao and Bradley up in air, despite the fact that Pacquiao already laid the law down to Arum by saying he wants the rematch.

Arum told Yahoo Sports writer Kevin Iole “I want to investigate whether there was any undue influence, whether the [Nevada Athletic Commission] gave any particular instruction and how they came to the conclusion…There needs to be an independent investigation because it strains credibility that an event everybody saw as so one-sided one way all three judges saw it as close.”

I think Arum is kidding himself if he thinks this gesture of asking for an investigation will go anywhere. It won’t. The judges did their job, and the fact that all three of them saw it as a close fight suggests that they did a fine job of scoring the rounds properly by noting that Bradley took control over the fight in the second half of the fight, showing much superior ring generalship against a one-armed pot shot fighter in Pacquiao.

All Pacquiao was doing was throwing left hands all night, and he really faded badly in the second half of the fight, especially during the tail end. Bradley’s body shots seemed to wear him down, and when Bradley started to use movement, Pacquiao was out of his league. Pacquiao didn’t have the wheels that he needed to get around the ring. Supposedly, his legs where in great shape, but he looked to be as awful as he did in his worst bouts against Joshua Clottey, Juan Manuel Marquez and Antonio Margarito.

There’s either some dead nerve tissue in Pacquiao’s legs or he’s too heavy to hop around like he used to. I think it’s age. You start losing fast twitch nerve fiber in your 20s and it rapidly goes downhill from there. For some fighters, they can keep enough to continue to have success late in their career, but for others, they’re pretty much shot as soon as they reach their early 30s.

Pacquiao is 33, and his legs weren’t there last night, and in the last four rounds of the fight, Pacquiao looked exhausted, and wasn’t even throwing punches. Arum can’t expect the judges to be ****** enough to give Pacquiao rounds simply because the crowd was screaming their bloody heads off each time Pacquiao missed by a mile with one his punches, and he was missing like crazy. Turn down the volume and try watching the fight, and you’ll see Pacquiao flailing around, fighting with no balance, no stamina, without legs.

I think Arum is just going this to make himself look good in front of Pacquiao, to show that he’s up in arms and trying to get his loss investigated. Believe me, nothing is going to come of this. Pacquiao will have to swallow the loss, take the pain and realize that he’s feeling what Juan Manuel Marquez felt in his three prior fights with Pacquiao. You can argue that Pacquiao came close to winning none of those fights. I had him losing all three, yet he was given wins in two of them.

[Da Hammer]

Duane Ford, who had it 115-113 Bradley:

"You've got to put the ball in the basket and Manny didn't put the ball in the basket enough. ... This isn't American Idol. If I judge for the people, I shouldn't be a judge. I went in with a clear mind and judged each round. ... I don't look at the punch stats but I saw Manny miss a lot of punches and Bradley hit Manny and win a lot of the exchanges. ... I'm comfortable with my performance. I thought Bradley gave Pacquiao a boxing lesson."

Jerry Roth, who had it 115-113 Pac

"I'm looking for effective aggressiveness. I thought Pacquiao won a lot of the early rounds, and I thought Bradley came on in the end. That's why I gave Bradley the last three rounds. But I still thought Pacquiao had done enough to win."

looks like the main reasoning for the decision is that Pac was more active, but they felt he was wild and missing, while Bradley was boxing and more effective

And yet every round Pacquiao outlanded Bradley and landed at much higher percentage. These judges should be suspended for incompetence.

[check hook]

you cant investigate stuff unless its pretty unanimous and the fact is there are some people who think Bradley won, it was a draw, or it was close. You cant investigate that.

i agree. It simply does not warrant any investigation. There have been far far worse decisions rendered in the last two or three years.

[badass316]

I read that article just recently.

Ford pretty much blew up his own argument with these lines:

"In pro boxing, you look for damage, and if the punches are equal and the damage is equal, you are looking for effective aggression, and that does not necessarily mean the guy going forward," Ford said. "Effective aggression can be a guy going back. And then you look at ring generalship, and that's all about control. "

[4Corners]

Jim Lampley mainly. He was the worst. If anyone had any question whether ir not he was Pro-Manny to the fullest, well they shouldn't have any questions anymore.

[Primera]

They are highly trained professionals.