[BigDigga]

[Intellectual 1]

Originally Posted by Midnight

Man you and ur bro can't be serious man, bradley did not win more than 3 rounds man, look at tim's body language after the fight, everyone knew he lost that fight man, anybody that even thinks other wise.............can't be serious....

You just got a Pac hard on that's all His speed and power can leave you in awe but I'm objective in every single round I score. I have no agenda in these fights...my scorecard doesn't matter...its just for fun.

But when people say oh Bradley can't win a round by throwing pitty pat shots then that's inexperience shining through a scorecard. There are many factors I take into account when I decide to give a fighter a round. There were some rounds where Bradley was winning the first 2 minutes of the round and then Pac would land 2-3 hard punches and the broadcasters would give it to Pac...I don't swing that hard. But like I said I had Pac winning it...its just not as big as a blowout as most think it is. Bradley kept his composure and snuck back into the fight.

I was watching the fight with my girlfriend and my exact words in the 11th were I don't think Bradley can win it if he took these rounds but he can sure make it interesting by making it 7-5 on my card. I gave him round 11 and 12 and I felt like it was a close fight but I feel what happened was most people lost interest midway through the fight because Pac was obliterating Bradley round after round so when Bradley starts putting together rounds they go largely unnoticed until you add it up on the scorecard.

And he wasn't winning them by as large a margin as Pac was in the early rounds and he wasn't winning them in a flashy manner. Part-time Fight fans don't like boxing...they like blood, knock downs, and queer street staggers so I expect the normal fan to expect it was a blowout.

[Unseen]

Bradley threw a lot of jabs but missed a lot. Most.

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Intellectual 1

You just got a Pac hard on that's all His speed and power can leave you in awe but I'm objective in every single round I score. I have no agenda in these fights...my scorecard doesn't matter...its just for fun.

But when people say oh Bradley can't win a round by throwing pitty pat shots then that's inexperience shining through a scorecard. There are many factors I take into account when I decide to give a fighter a round. There were some rounds where Bradley was winning the first 2 minutes of the round and then Pac would land 2-3 hard punches and the broadcasters would give it to Pac...I don't swing that hard. But like I said I had Pac winning it...its just not as big as a blowout as most think it is. Bradley kept his composure and snuck back into the fight.

I was watching the fight with my girlfriend and my exact words in the 11th were I don't think Bradley can win it if he took these rounds but he can sure make it interesting by making it 7-5 on my card. I gave him round 11 and 12 and I felt like it was a close fight but I feel what happened was most people lost interest midway through the fight because Pac was obliterating Bradley round after round so when Bradley starts putting together rounds they go largely unnoticed until you add it up on the scorecard.

And he wasn't winning them by as large a margin as Pac was in the early rounds and he wasn't winning them in a flashy manner. Part-time Fight fans don't like boxing...they like blood, knock downs, and queer street staggers so I expect the normal fan to expect it was a blowout.

I didn't say pitty pat punches can't win a round, I said pitty pat shots to the glove.

[thesmokingman]

Bradley was really accurate at hitting the freaking AIR!

[Dr. Sweet Science]

Originally Posted by Dtwizzy2k8

Why are you so quick to assume that the judges were scoring the fights based on their honest opinions instead of how they were paid to score it? Are you really that naive and ignorant of how corrupt boxing is?

All 3 judges are well experienced officials who have done many championship fights before hand. The last travesty I watched was the Williams-Lara bout...not one of those judges were as experienced as any of the judges in this bout.

Originally Posted by Bigblock

Bradley won two rounds max and I hate Pacquiao. He looked like a bobble head in there getting rocked almost every round. Marquez vs Pac was close, this fight was decent but it was beyond obvious that Bradley isn't on par with Pacquiao. Bradley is tough and a warrior but he lost very clearly tonight.

Every round? Nah early in the fight he was getting rocked, the latter half of the fight Bradley was starting to chain his combos together. Pacman had his moments but Bradley took majority of those rounds in the latter half.

[AmVhon]

Originally Posted by Dr. Sweet Science

You said that Pac one the fight, and Im not arguing that...he very well could have won that fight. Again I scored it a draw with 3 swing rounds, so it could've easily gone either way. But most of the people right now on this forum are crying foul, yet they have no record of the fight...no scorecard. That's like going to the judge to tell that a man committed murder yet shows ZERO evidence. So how am I suppose to take that seriously? But I respect your opinion, and like a boxing fan you scored the fight and debate with reason. Like you I scored the fight and can easily back it up on how or why I scored the way I did. All I'm saying is that the fight was closer than what some stated, you included. That fight wasn't one sided, yes Pac did dominate some rounds but not the ENTIRE fight.

I agree that it wasn't a Pac domination. And also withdraw the demote and retarded post remarks..

[Unseen]

Originally Posted by Intellectual 1

Unfortunately the opinion of the world holds little value to the officials (with incredible experience I might add) who sit with the cards. And I can see half of the world being fans....out of that half I'd say 10-15% know how to put together a decent unbiased scorecard. Most watch the fight, very few keep tabs on the scorecards.

And my scorecard isn't outrageous . You said it yourself. However I seem to have a problem with yours and probably will eventually have to agree to disagree with it.

Originally Posted by Unseen

There is a huge difference between 115-112 one way or the other, unless you think JMM lost to Pac 3 then.

Bradley pitty patted glove, he hit glove.

Originally Posted by Intellectual 1

Its not a big difference if you objectively score it. If Manny lost it...it was in the 2nd half but I had him winning by a round. I'm not screaming robbery over 1 or 2 more rounds being scored toward the other man's way.

JMM robbery > Bradley Robbery

Best change your mind on the bold then.

[Dr. Sweet Science]

Originally Posted by Unseen

Bradley threw a lot of jabs but missed a lot. Most.

And you're using compubox stats as your proof?

[Unseen]

Yes Pac was not dominant in the later rounds, but it was clear. Hipkin's Dawson was close but CLEAR. Bradley simply hit a lot of glove and got very little through. Pac missed when Bradley ducked but he also landed 1 or 2 here and there and that was all that was needed.