The judges made the RIGHT decision, and here is why

[LBJ2010]

First off, I had Pac winning the fight. But then again, fans and judges score a fight using different criteria. When you factor that in, I think the judges made the right decision.

• Clean Punching
  
  Pac wins this no doubt.
  
  
• Effective Aggression
  
  The judges thought Pacquiao was very aggressive but not effective, that he was missing wildly and getting off balanced.
  
  
• Ring Generalship
  
  Ring Generalship is defined as fighting the way you want to fight. So the question to ask is, who fought the way they wanted. Did Pacquiao make it the kind of fight he wanted, or did Bradley.
  
  The fight was slow paced and more of a boxing match, which in the judges eyes is the type of fight Bradley wanted. Bradley controlled the pace with his jab for 2/3 of the rounds, and avoided exchanges. Pacquiao was not able to make it a brawl and force the toe to toe action like he wanted.
  
  
• Defense
  
  I think Bradley demonstrated to the judges greater defense in slipping Pacquaio's punching, avoiding his flurries, and making him miss a lot
  

So Pacquiao landed the cleaner more effective punches, but that was only 1/4 of the criteria, and Bradley arguably won the other 3. Plus, if a guy controls the action for 2/3 of the round, and the other guy dominates the last 1/3, is it fair to give the round to the other guy?

So overall, maybe the real problem is how fights are scored. But I don't think you can blame the judges for following the official criteria

[Weebler I]

If by right you mean wrong, then yeah...

[Dunkeroo23]

I kind of agree. I had Pac winning, but I have Bradley winning using that criteria. Kind of like in court when a jury returns an unpopular decision, that they themselves dont believe, but is right according to the law.

As TS said, I think the real problem is the way judges are told to score a fight, not the judges themselves

[DoubleDatJab]

Brian Kenny approves this thread

[hugh grant]

Bradley didnt do what he said he would do before the fight, so ring generalship goes to Pac. Bradley couldnt do what he originally wanted so surived as best as he could under the circumstances. He originally wanted to take it to Pac, but realized Pac was superior so had to have a different plan to the original.

Everything Pac did better, thats why he recieved less punches than Brad. Bradlesy pitter patter punches shouldnt even have counted if your opponent dont feel it, theres no point in defending it. Brads alll show, no go.

[Weebler I]

Okay, I actually bothered to read your post...

[*]Clean Punching

Pac wins this no doubt.

[*]Effective Aggression

The judges thought Pacquiao was very aggressive but not effective, that he was missing wildly and getting off balanced.

and Bradley's aggression? it's one to say Pacquiao wasn't effective but surely you have to make a case as to why Bradley was better?

[*]Ring Generalship

Ring Generalship is defined as fighting the way you want to fight. So the question to ask is, who fought the way they wanted. Did Pacquiao make it the kind of fight he wanted, or did Bradley.

The fight was slow paced and more of a boxing match, which in the judges eyes is the type of fight Bradley wanted. Bradley controlled the pace with his jab for 2/3 of the rounds, and avoided exchanges. Pacquiao was not able to make it a brawl and force the toe to toe action like he wanted.

I disagree, from the start Pacquiao deliberately sat behind the guard and brought Bradley onto him numerous times until he hurt him - then Bradley got on his bike as hurt fighters usually do.

[*]Defense

I think Bradley demonstrated to the judges greater defense in slipping Pacquaio's punching, avoiding his flurries, and making him miss a lot[/LIST]

So overall, maybe the real problem is how fights are scored. But I don't think you can blame the judges for following the official criteria

Only category you've really made a good case for Bradley is defense because Bradley did evade a lot punches, the others are for Pacquiao. Let's be honest, the judges scores are inexplicable.

[PAC-BOY]

9 rounds pac...1 round even...2 rounds Bradey ,and they were close

[Boxing Bob]

twist it any way you want, but anything less than a scorecard for Pac is borderline criminal. And I'm a Mayweather fan!

[Bermuda]

decision went to the wrong person..end of. you have 99.9% of boxing journalists (from ring magazine, espn, maxboxing, etc.), long time critics of pacquiao (mayweathers, teddy atlas, etc.), bradley's manager cameron dunkin, a slew of professional boxers and trainers all saying pac won...

[Wreckless]

If someone wanted to find ways to give someone the win, then you can do that with ANY fight.
Bottom line is Pacquiao landed the cleaner effective punches.
Despite what compubox says, Pac landed more than double.

There is a difference between counter punching to a victory, and surviving.