Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

*SPOILERS* Pacquiao vs Bradley

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by Tranquil Suit View Post

    At the same time, you don't have to add *Spoilers* in a thread title. I mean, if a fight happened and you don't wanna know the outcome, then it's common sense not to read a thread about that fight.


    Cheers
    I am going to disagree, we've been putting spoiler tags, for years, for the boneheads. Better to put *spoiler* in the thread title, since we do start fight threads early, just in case.

    Originally posted by Rivington View Post
    Pac has lost half a step or so, but still clearly won the fight. The judges were still sore from criticism following the previous fight, I think, and bent over backward to be "fair" to the underdog.
    Yep. An interesting theory floated is now they have a potential three fight money maker. This did well and now Manny wants revenge. If that one goes well and he wins we get the tie breaker.
    Last edited by It is Fake; 6/10/2012 3:50pm, .

    Comment


      #17
      Bleacher report is running a poll as to who won the fight, when I looked, 1,744 people had responded. 95.8% said Pacquiao. Boxing Scene's running the same thing, out of 372 people, 86.02% are saying Pac. It was clear when watching it who the victor was.

      But, on the very odd occasions that a fighter is unlucky with camera angles etc it can be misleading. So, here are the stats:

      "According to Compubox, Bradley threw a total of 839 punches, while Pacquiao let loose 751 but the Filipino landed 253 (34 percent) and Bradley just got in 159 (19 percent).

      In the power punches department, Pacquiao posted 493 and landed 190 for 39 percent, while Bradley registered 390 and landed only 108 for 28 percent.

      Pacquiao also had the edge in the jabs department by connecting 63 out of 258 (24 percent) but Bradley threw more with 449 and got in only 51 (11 percent)."

      Yes, none of those numbers are enormous, but that's down to Pac and Bradley's styles, both of which throw a lot and expect a fairly large margin of error. Nonetheless, these figures demonstrate Pacquiao's CLEAR dominance.

      I find this depressing, because this isn't just a case of hard core boxing fans moaning. Boxing has taken a massively public super fight and just shown the entire world that it's either: a): judged by spastics who know less about the sport than a casual observer, or b): crooked as fuck.

      If it can't sort those two problems out, it should at least try to fucking disguise them...

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by It is Fake View Post
        I am going to disagree, we've been putting spoiler tags, for years, for the boneheads. Better to put *spoiler* in the thread title, since we do start fight threads early, just in case.

        Yep. An interesting theory floated is now they have a potential three fight money maker. This did well and now Manny wants revenge. If that one goes well and he wins we get the tie breaker.
        But how would this compare with a Pacman / Money fight? It wouldn't raise anywhere near the cash, nor will it be as competitive. I think Bradley took the rounds he did because Pac knew he'd won on points and was resting on laurels (an unfortunate habit he's developed). And even then it was one sided in Pacs favour.

        Mind you, I doubt Bob Arum gives a fuck about that. Arsehole.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by battheo View Post
          But how would this compare with a Pacman / Money fight?
          I wouldn't compare the two. One exists, the other is hyperbole. 3 years of bullshit. You know the saying, so I won't post it. You have at least one guaranteed, unless Pacquio retires, fight. Or you can chase another fight for another three years.
          It wouldn't raise anywhere near the cash, nor will it be as competitive. I think Bradley took the rounds he did because Pac knew he'd won on points and was resting on laurels (an unfortunate habit he's developed). And even then it was one sided in Pacs favour.

          Mind you, I doubt Bob Arum gives a fuck about that. Arsehole.
          You are arguing from a fan standpoint. I know which one would make more money and that is a non issue. I would love to see Manny vs Pacquio.

          This is a hard numbers game now. This is one of the few times wrong math makes sense. Again, 3+0=0. Bradley vs. Pacquio made money. Three years later, I'm not including the 7 YEARS of Pacquio's run, Manny vs. Floyd has made zero dollars. I know which fight HAS already made money, has almost guaranteed potential to make more money, and potentially make a third purse.

          I know which one has been scuttled for 3, I won't mention seven again, years with zero revenue. They aren't getting any younger. Another three or four years and it will be Holyfield vs.Tyson. I enjoyed the fight, it made a ton of money, but I finished watching thinking "what if?"
          Last edited by It is Fake; 6/10/2012 4:39pm, .

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by battheo View Post
            Bleacher report is running a poll as to who won the fight, when I looked, 1,744 people had responded. 95.8% said Pacquiao. Boxing Scene's running the same thing, out of 372 people, 86.02% are saying Pac. It was clear when watching it who the victor was.

            But, on the very odd occasions that a fighter is unlucky with camera angles etc it can be misleading. So, here are the stats:

            "According to Compubox, Bradley threw a total of 839 punches, while Pacquiao let loose 751 but the Filipino landed 253 (34 percent) and Bradley just got in 159 (19 percent).

            In the power punches department, Pacquiao posted 493 and landed 190 for 39 percent, while Bradley registered 390 and landed only 108 for 28 percent.

            Pacquiao also had the edge in the jabs department by connecting 63 out of 258 (24 percent) but Bradley threw more with 449 and got in only 51 (11 percent)."

            Yes, none of those numbers are enormous, but that's down to Pac and Bradley's styles, both of which throw a lot and expect a fairly large margin of error. Nonetheless, these figures demonstrate Pacquiao's CLEAR dominance.

            I find this depressing, because this isn't just a case of hard core boxing fans moaning. Boxing has taken a massively public super fight and just shown the entire world that it's either: a): judged by spastics who know less about the sport than a casual observer, or b): crooked as fuck.

            If it can't sort those two problems out, it should at least try to fucking disguise them...
            Wow, I didn't realize that there was that BIG of a disparity in the stats.... That is totally ridiculous. Almost sickening...

            I watched the fight knowing that Bradley had already won, but I didn't read the play by play or look up any of the stats. because I wanted to be as unbiased and objective as possible. It was clear that Pacquiao had won by a narrow margin, but it was a solid narrow margin that didn't leave much room for Bradley to edge him on the cards.

            Through rounds 3 through 9, Pacquiao found his rythm and set a pretty steady pace during that period of stalking Bradley and landing the straight left. He held his guard high but countered pretty well when Bradley would go the body. The only way you could give those rounds to Bradley were if you were to score the glancing jabs that he threw against Pac's guard and the occasional body shot that he got through.

            Judges CJ Ross and Duane Ford are the ones to blame for this robbery. And yes, this is a robbery.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by It is Fake View Post
              I wouldn't. 3 years of bullshit? You know the saying, so I won't post it. You have at least one guaranteed, unless Pacquio retires, fight. Or you can chase another fight for another three years.
              You are arguing from a fan standpoint. I know which one would make more money and that is a non issue. I would love to see Manny vs Pacquio.

              This is a hard numbers game now. This is one of the few times wrong math makes sense. Again, 3+0=0. Bradley vs. Pacquio made money. Three year later, I'm not including the 7 YEARS of Pacquio's run, Manny vs. Floyd has made zero dollars. I know which fight HAS already made money, has almost guaranteed potential to make more money, and potentially make a third purse.

              I know which one has been scuttled for 3, I won't mention seven again, years with zero revenue.
              No I totally agree, hence the Arum complaint. But yes, I look at it as a standard boxing fan rather than a business man.

              It really is a pity. I guess it's bad business for Manny and Floyd to meet in the ring... after all, when one of them loses, they suddenly lose access to the cash cow. Now I don't think that Manny is riding that, but Arum certainly is. As is Floyd. So I guess it was never going to happen.

              At least in the UFC talent can't run from talent. Oh well...

              Comment


                #22
                Yeah, I figured we were talking past each other. There is no way all three fights will make as much money as ONE Mayweather vs. Paquio fight.

                I'd pay for that and I haven't purchased a PPV fight in at least 20 years.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Boxing really needs a change. There are too many great fights that we'll never see.....Manny v. Floyd; Vitali v. Wladimir. Ring magazine had to change their damn criteria for what it takes to be RING champion (really the most legit belt to have) just because almost all of their champion spots were vacant......because no one can seem to make a No.1 and No.2 contender face eachother.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Wow, holy shit. Normally when people cry about a controversial decision and its a close fight where, even if you don't agree with the decision, you could at least see how someone might score it that way. The "worst judging ever" thing just comes from the usual narcissism of sports fans and internet dwellers who thinks anyone who disagrees with the way they see things is the worst person to ever exist.

                    But... damn. That really was a one sided fight in Pacquiao's favor. I honestly can't see any justification for giving Bradley more than four, maybe five, rounds. Definitely not a good night for boxing.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by It is Fake View Post
                      Yeah, I figured we were talking past each other. There is no way all three fights will make as much money as ONE Mayweather vs. Paquio fight.

                      I'd pay for that and I haven't purchased a PPV fight in at least 20 years.
                      Ha, the last two I purchased were Fedor v Bigfoot (yeah, I wanted and expected Fedor to win) which I didn't see because the recording cut out as Fedor walked to the ring, and this one (where I was, quite obviously from my posts thus far) backing Manny. So I may never buy another PPV... I don't seem to have the luck!

                      Also, some fraudsters got hold of my information, and keep phoning me for fights I 'haven't paid for' from Primetime, which is sort of like finding out that the cherry on a particularly bad cake is actually a ball of shit painted red. I tell them to fuck off, and if anybody else out there gets these phone calls, I suggest you do the same.

                      What we need is a benevolent dictatorship lead by a man who respects good fight sport. He could make all the right people fight each other when they should, offer it all for free on government run stations, and stop Steven Seagal making movies.

                      Viva la revolution.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by battheo View Post
                        and stop Steven Seagal making movies.
                        Viva la revolution.
                        I can't join your revolution, it is far to extreme for me. I used to love Seagal movies because of how awesome the fight scenes were. Then I loved them because one of them had DMX in it, and that was awesome. What you people don't understand is that he has secretly been making ironic comedies for the past 10 years.

                        Viva la Seagal (four-in-one special for $4.99 at the supermarket!)

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by lordbd View Post
                          I can't join your revolution, it is far to extreme for me. I used to love Seagal movies because of how awesome the fight scenes were. Then I loved them because one of them had DMX in it, and that was awesome. What you people don't understand is that he has secretly been making ironic comedies for the past 10 years.

                          Viva la Seagal (four-in-one special for $4.99 at the supermarket!)

                          Comment


                            #28
                            You are now enlightened.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Damn did the fan outrage backlash scare boxing?

                              http://sports.yahoo.com/news/boxing-...gYpFpY9285nYcB

                              Promoter Bob Arum was still fuming about the split-decision verdict that went against Manny Pacquiao on Saturday and said there would be no rematch with Timothy Bradley unless Nevada attorney general Catherine Cortez Masto launches an investigation.

                              Bradley, a 4-1 underdog, upset Pacquiao in one of the most controversial outcomes in years to take the World Boxing Organization welterweight title.

                              All three judges scored it 115-113, with Duane Ford and C.J. Ross seeing it in favor of Bradley and Jerry Roth siding with Pacquiao.

                              The rematch that Bradley thought he would get may be on hold, at least for a while, however. Arum, whose company promotes both fighters, said his feeling that Pacquiao had won a wide decision had not changed a day later.
                              Interesting. It could be a "deflect blame from me" hype job, but this might get good.
                              LOL Bullshit. Judge Ford is saying he had it 4-2 and Manny only won one more round:
                              "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.
                              Shit, Ali fought going backwards this guy would have him losing 30% of his fights.
                              Last edited by It is Fake; 6/10/2012 9:33pm, .

                              Comment


                                #30
                                So... Corruption or incompetence?


                                My first thought was corruption, cause otherwise , it would be stunningly incompetent. But, Iunno, maybe it just was. At least I don't see enough reason for Arum&co to tweak the judges.

                                Another Marquez rematch was hot after the last close match, Mayweather was turning around (after he saw the Marquez fight, I'm sure he reevaulated his chances). It's not like Bradley was the only possible up and coming challenger.

                                I just don't see enough motive for Arum to have fixed the judges. Maybe it was from another source, who knows.

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                                Working...
                                X