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

[D4thincarnation]

but that not compubox at all and give more points to one punch over the other is a bad idea this not the amatures

It doesn't matter what it is, it will improve boxing.

[Doctor_Tenma]

I dont know why could anyone see that pac was not the ring general on this fight just amazes me... manny controlled the tempo of the fight and we only have action when he wanted to...

LOL, Pacquiao controlled the ring and was the aggressor.

Bradley injured both his feet running from Pacquiao.

He was referring to the first round I believe.

[loui_ludwig]

LOL, haters will just jump on the wagon of an opponent of Pac.

[Curtiz]

I dont know why could anyone see that pac was not the ring general on this fight just amazes me... manny controlled the tempo of the fight and we only have action when he wanted to...

Just rewatched the 1st round.

Still have it as a bradley round.

Backing pac up 75% of the round with triple jabs, countering well.

Pac didnt do anything till the last 20 seconds & even then it wasnt significant.

Watched it with the sound turned off.

Bradley definitely got round 1.

[IJ1]

Pac was playing with Bradley (and smiling at the announcers) in this fight. It was that one-sided for Pacquiao.

Bradley tried to act slick with his head movement but he still got caught quite often despite that. Bradley had no answer. Pacquiao was constantly outlanding him... and landing the bigger shots... and being the aggressor/walking him down.

This fight wasn't even close.


EDIT:
Btw, those watching with the sound off are not doing themselves any favors. Sounds will help you see hits that may look like they missed but actually landed.. Watch it with sound and ignore the commentary.

[Warring Don]

The first time i saw the fight i saw Pacquiao winning. But i was watching as a spectator not as a judge. I just watched it round by round from a judges perspective and this was my score

rd 1 bradley 10-9
rd 2 bradley 10-9
rd 3 pacquaio 10-9
rd 4 pacquaio 10-9
rd 5 pacquaio 10-9
rd 6 pacquaio 10-9
rd 7 draw-9-9
rd 8 bradley 10-9
rd 9 bradley1 10-9
rd 10 bradley 10-9
rd 11 bradley 10-9
rd 12 bradley 10-9

115-112 Bradley

I don't see this as a robbery it was a close fight and bradley took it.

[BoxingGenius27]

I think Kizer needs to leave his post

From allowing MMA fighters to take steroids to the endless stream of robbery and controversy in several different sports let alone boxing, he aint doing his job

Wait a minute.

Are you actually admitting there's corruption in NSAC?

What happen to :

"let the commission do their jobs"

"Unless fighters take year round testing, there's no way to combat cheaters; so testing outside of NSAC is moot".

LMAO It was all good before. Now that reality has hit close to home, now all of a sudden you're all up in arms.

But for the last 2 years, you've been up here calling everyone "haters" if they disagreed with NSAC's process. Lol Glad your true colors have been exposed.

[IJ1]

Watching the fight as a judge (I've now seen the fight twice)... at the very most... you could give Bradley 3-4 rounds... and that's being as generous as you could possibly be (giving Bradley every benefit of the doubt).

I had it 10-2 in favor of Pacquiao. This was an easy fight to score. Bradley tried really hard and deserves that respect... but he was outclassed. He's just not on Pac's level.

Marquez III was polarizing and came down to what you considered effective aggression and ring generalship (and was a close fight on a round-by-round basis... with numerous rounds being toss-ups).

Pac/Bradley was not even close. Huge one-sided win for Manny.

[loui_ludwig]

Like i said, my only problem with Bradley is at first he was unsure he won or not, then later he said he won.

And to be fair, in Philboxing, they have an article on Judge Jerry Roth. He has Pac winning 7 rounds to 5 and believes the fight was closer.

Well there were a lot of close rounds but I thought in the early part of the fight Pacquiao was doing very good. In fact I gave him five of the first six rounds. Then in the latter part of the fight I thought he just didn’t do enough. He didn’t have that killer instinct he usually has. He was sort of backing up, Bradley was coming on and I thought coming on fairly strong. That’s why I gave four of the last six rounds to Bradley and ended up a two point fight, seven to five.”

Then a media who scored it for Pac by 9 rounds to 3, watched the tape again have Pac winning again at 8 rounds to 4. This reporter have a few of the rounds closer.

Final observations: A second viewing of the fight convinced this writer of two things. Pacquiao still won the fight, but a few of the rounds were closer. Bradley is effective in ways that are difficult to perceive. Pacquiao was the harder puncher throughout. His coasting at times cost him. However, he still deserved the verdict based on harder and effective punching.

First viewing scoring: 117-111 Pacquaio.

Second look: 116-112

So a boxing judge believed the fight was closer. While a media person had a few rounds were closer and changed his scorecard after watching it a 2nd time. But they both have Pacquiao winning.
__________________

[-DSG-]

I think Pac may have been head hunting which decreased his activity in the first minute of some rounds. But I don't think Bradley did enough to win convincingly. Bradley just got stunned too many times like Marquez getting kd three times.

pacquiao was not the effective aggressor or the ring general