Comments Thread For: Arum: Pacquiao-Bradley Rematch Bigger Than First Fight

[DigitalBeast]

Tim got injured well after Manny had established control of the bout. IMO his injury in no way affecte the outcome of the fight.

I am a fan that doesn't like to see rematches where one isn't warranted. A rematch IMO isn't warranted here. Other than judge tampering I don't think anything will change from the st fight. I could be wrong.

Two quite dynamic fighters are going to fight, but you care nothing for it? Just doesn't fit in my brain. Also, you sure Tim didn't get the injury in the second round? That doesn't qualify as very, very early in the fight to you? C'mon...

[Heavy Heart]

This fight will end up in UD, Pacman will win this time.And for the haters, just stream it.

[Rome-By-Ko]

Tim got injured well after Manny had established control of the bout. IMO his injury in no way affecte the outcome of the fight.

I am a fan that doesn't like to see rematches where one isn't warranted. A rematch IMO isn't warranted here. Other than judge tampering I don't think anything will change from the st fight. I could be wrong.

Well this is not true..According to the judges and to my own scorecard,Manny did not take control until the 4th..I believe All 3 judges had the first 3 rds fairly close(with good reason)..When Bradley rolled the ankle he loss the next 3 rds(imo) and it clearly effect him..Oh and he clearly rolled his ankle and was injured..To say a injury to a fighters ankle would not have any effect in a fight is kinda ****** bro..That's like me saying Floyd hurting his arm in the JLC fight did not hurt what Floyd could do in that fight..Mind you we never had vid proof of what cause the injury to May,we do with Bradley tho..

[WilkinsOlajuwon]

To bring up fighters from the 1950's and 1970's having multiple fights is not relevant. Those were completely different era's. Most of those multiple fights were made because of the profit margin. Its also one thing to fight someone 3-6 times out of 125 pro fights than it is 2-3 out of 30-40.

Vaz/Marg the rematches were warranted based on the action and the outcomes. They are also mid level fighters. Unnecesssary rematches among the highest profile fighters is a little different.

I wasnt talking about your post. No need to get defensive. I'm addressing the fanboy dreck that thinks fighting a guy 3-4 times is a bad thing. That's the problem when people draw a line in the sand.

Pac v Marquez 2-4 was made because of "profit margin" as was Vazquez Marquez. So I think you are missing the point. If there is action, money, competitiveness and meaningful titles at stake fighting an opponent multiple times is warranted.

[The Big Dunn]

Two quite dynamic fighters are going to fight, but you care nothing for it? Just doesn't fit in my brain. Also, you sure Tim didn't get the injury in the second round? That doesn't qualify as very, very early in the fight to you? C'mon...

I have not said anything critical about the matchup or this fight have I?

Could you at least be more honest about this. Two dynamic fighters are fighting a rematch of a fight one guy won 8 rds to 4 or 9-3- with the guy who lost wnning the last 3-4 rounds.

I could be wrong about the injury. If I am, I stand corrected. I don't believe the injury affected the outcome.

If you want to see it again I have no problem with that. I just don't think the outcome will be different based on what I saw in the first fight.

[The Big Dunn]

Well this is not true..According to the judges and to my own scorecard,Manny did not take control until the 4th..I believe All 3 judges had the first 3 rds fairly close(with good reason)..When Bradley rolled the ankle he loss the next 3 rds(imo) and it clearly effect him..Oh and he clearly rolled his ankle and was injured..To say a injury to a fighters ankle would not have any effect in a fight is kinda ****** bro..That's like me saying Floyd hurting his arm in the JLC fight did not hurt what Floyd could do in that fight..Mind you we never had vid proof of what cause the injury to May,we do with Bradley tho..

As I said to digital Beast I may be wrong about the ankle injury. If so I stand corrected.

I don't feel the ankle injury affected the outcome. If you disagree so be it. bringing up floyd v castillo 1 has nothing to do with this fight. That was a much closer fight where a rematch was clearly warranted. As for the other stuff, its clear you think my opinion has something to do with me bein a floyd fan.

After the fight, Bob was very clear that there wouldn't be and there was no need for a rematch. Ifound myself agreeing with him. Yes, time has passed and there are conflicts that prevent other fights we want more from happening. I still don't see the need for this again.

[junior gong]

I have not said anything critical about the matchup or this fight have I?

Could you at least be more honest about this. Two dynamic fighters are fighting a rematch of a fight one guy won 8 rds to 4 or 9-3- with the guy who lost wnning the last 3-4 rounds.

I could be wrong about the injury. If I am, I stand corrected. I don't believe the injury affected the outcome.

If you want to see it again I have no problem with that. I just don't think the outcome will be different based on what I saw in the first fight.

I bet you're really looking forward to floyd v chinless, though.

[shade darkar]

Tim got injured well after Manny had established control of the bout. IMO his injury in no way affecte the outcome of the fight.

I am a fan that doesn't like to see rematches where one isn't warranted. A rematch IMO isn't warranted here. Other than judge tampering I don't think anything will change from the st fight. I could be wrong.

jesus!!!!!!!!!!!! something we agree on!

[Pacquiao'd]

Of course it's a compelling rematch...Bradley is arguably now the #2 fighter at 147 and a champion and still undefeated even though he should've lost the first fight. So yeah out of the two top boxing names active in the sport one is fighting the #2 boxer in the division and the number #1 guy is going to be fighting someone who should be ranked like #18 at 147 I think TR has the better headlining event out of the two. Now give us a some decent undercards and let's goooooo. The true story here is what happens to Marquez? Seems like he may end up having to fight a nobody or have no choice but to fight Provodnikov. Or maybe Rios?

#2 after who and ahead of who?

But Im down for this fight.

[Rome-By-Ko]

As I said to digital Beast I may be wrong about the ankle injury. If so I stand corrected.

I don't feel the ankle injury affected the outcome. If you disagree so be it. bringing up floyd v castillo 1 has nothing to do with this fight. That was a much closer fight where a rematch was clearly warranted. As for the other stuff, its clear you think my opinion has something to do with me bein a floyd fan.

After the fight, Bob was very clear that there wouldn't be and there was no need for a rematch. Ifound myself agreeing with him. Yes, time has passed and there are conflicts that prevent other fights we want more from happening. I still don't see the need for this again.

I do disagree with you,not to mention every card read 115-113 That's a close fight..I can't tell you what to see(and vice versa)but based off the scores this fight was close and does obviously deserve a rematch..

I bring up Floyd cause I know ya like Floyd..Not trying to say your opinion is somewhat swayed cause of Floyd..Just to give an example of how an injury within a fight can really hurt what a fighter can do..To not see that is to be a bit blind imo..

I believe both these fighters deserve another fight with each other..For a ton of reasons tbh..