What happened to rematches after a controversial loss.

There should be no rematch. Pacquiao beat Bradley so bad, broke his two legs and he needed to put in wheelchair.

Why are you comparing the situation to Marquez's? The reaction of those two events are completely different, none of this ''Pacquiao should hand his belt over to Marquez'' garbage and none of this ''The commission should declare Marquez the winner'' etc. No, people accepted that it was a robbery, accept that things should be done in the future to eliminate it from the sport but ultimately every time Marquez has been robbed against Pacquiao he sought to settle things in the rings. Hopkins v Pascal was not a close fight neither was Malignaggi v Diaz. Abril v Rios was a one sided beating, despite that Abril wants the rematch ( Unfortunately Rios won't give him the opportunity to set the record straight). Hopkins vs. Pascal was absolutely a close fight. Those knockdowns definitely gave Pascal a case for a draw.

I don't understand boxing fans. Actually I do, what I should say is that boxing fans irritate me. Controversial losses/wins are a part of the sport, they piss me off and steps should be taken to prevent them from happening. I personally had Pacquiao winning in a close fight the minority has Bradley winning. I think a lot of the outrage is down to the initial outcry, casual fans won't watch the fight twice, hardcore fans are afraid to admit that they were influenced by HBO, and Pac Stans.... well they still believe he beat Marquez in their third fight not a lot needs to be said. Anyway the above is essentially irrelevant as Pacquiao has the opportunity to set the record straight outside of the boohooing to the commission to launch and investigation and what not. I thought Hopkins was cheated out of a win against Pascal, he rematched him and won. Thought Malignaggi was cheated out of a win against Diaz, he rematched him and won. People thought Mayweather robbed Castillo, rematched him and beat him again. People thought Cotto was cheated against Margarito, he rematched him and won. I could understand the flack Bradley's receiving if he took the controversial win and said ''fvck you'' to a Pacquiao rematch but the ball really is in Pacquiao's court. As things stand it seems as though people are going out of their way to make him the unofficial winner of that fight. When the only reason one guy won a fight is to set up a rematch that allows the other fighter to duck someone the sport has been calling for him to fight for 3 years, it's hard to get excited for that rematch. Especially when I have to pay 60 bucks to watch it (legally).

It would be better if Paq-man just retire. These opponents of his don't deserve millions of dollars just by running and surviving. Makes me really puke. They disgust me to no end, if you ask me.

These decisions are so ridiculous that they don't need a rematch. Genuinely close decisions tend to get a second fight.

2 wrongs don't make a right. Marquez beat Pacquiao Pacquiao beat Bradley FACTS Why are you comparing the situation to Marquez's? The reaction of those two events are completely different, none of this ''Pacquiao should hand his belt over to Marquez'' garbage and none of this ''The commission should declare Marquez the winner'' etc. No, people accepted that it was a robbery, accept that things should be done in the future to eliminate it from the sport but ultimately every time Marquez has been robbed against Pacquiao he sought to settle things in the rings. Rematches are good after close fights. Pacquiao vs Bradley wasn't close. No need to see another one-sided fight. Hopkins v Pascal was not a close fight neither was Malignaggi v Diaz. Abril v Rios was a one sided beating, despite that Abril wants the rematch ( Unfortunately Rios won't give him the opportunity to set the record straight).

Well to answer you question, it's money. Pac is the cash cow, not Bradley. So if Pac doesn't want to do it that's on him. The examples you displayed were based on money as well, these guys weren't going to get a bigger pay day had the fought anyone else at the time.

Arum wants the bad stink to wear off the Bradley match so that fans will forget about it just like the did with the Marquez fights. Smart move by the old man, I don't like saying that though....

Rematches are good after close fights. Pacquiao vs Bradley wasn't close. No need to see another one-sided fight.

I don't understand boxing fans. Actually I do, what I should say is that boxing fans irritate me. Controversial losses/wins are a part of the sport, they piss me off and steps should be taken to prevent them from happening. I personally had Pacquiao winning in a close fight the minority has Bradley winning. I think a lot of the outrage is down to the initial outcry, casual fans won't watch the fight twice, hardcore fans are afraid to admit that they were influenced by HBO, and Pac Stans.... well they still believe he beat Marquez in their third fight not a lot needs to be said. Anyway the above is essentially irrelevant as Pacquiao has the opportunity to set the record straight outside of the boohooing to the commission to launch and investigation and what not. I thought Hopkins was cheated out of a win against Pascal, he rematched him and won. Thought Malignaggi was cheated out of a win against Diaz, he rematched him and won. People thought Mayweather robbed Castillo, rematched him and beat him again. People thought Cotto was cheated against Margarito, he rematched him and won. I could understand the flack Bradley's receiving if he took the controversial win and said ''fvck you'' to a Pacquiao rematch but the ball really is in Pacquiao's court. As things stand it seems as though people are going out of their way to make him the unofficial winner of that fight. excellent post :boxing:

Not to go off topic, but I do want to point out your signature proves that a lot of the criticism the judges are getting from the fight isn't fair. Angles and view are everything in boxing judging and your signature gifs prove that. Major props my man. In all seriousness Bradley did this throughout the fight, if not for the size limit I would have added so much more. Thanks :fing02:

Would have liked to see Pacquiao vs. Berto or Ortiz as those would have made for exciting fights, but he's obviously gonna be facing both Marquez and Bradley next. Not to go off topic, but I do want to point out your signature proves that a lot of the criticism the judges are getting from the fight isn't fair. Angles and view are everything in boxing judging and your signature gifs prove that. Major props my man.

Would have liked to see Pacquiao vs. Berto or Ortiz as those would have made for exciting fights, but he's obviously gonna be facing both Marquez and Bradley next.

Good point, tread & logic. but this is where the business of boxing & star status comes into play. Bradley is now officially the villain of the casual fan community. While Pacman is supposed to be the victim. It's the fans to blame most. Superstar fighters get credit for $h!t that didn't happen. Then the entire hbo boxing production studios. Their bias was written into the script before the fight. Bradley-Pacman 2 is the fight that should happen. I think deep down inside the majority of Pacman stans know that Bradley with 2 healthy feet give Pacman a dose of rounds 10-12 fot the entire night & they're afraid to see it happen. But what they don't seem to realize is that Marquez is getting the long deserved w if they fight a 4th time.