IJ1

hahaha. wow I love it that posters like you have to actually come up with this stuff. Manny lost the fight. Not the 1st bad decision, wont be the last. Just 1st time for manny and posters like you are soo upset. I didn't come up with it, footage can back that up. I'm a fan of Marquez and Mayweather (not partial to Pacquiao). I gave him an even chance to win the fight. That's just how I saw it. I'm not new to boxing... at all. That's why I know the difference between a polarizing close fight (Pac/Marquez) and a one-sided near-shut out victory (Pac/Bradley). I'd love to hear how you scored Canelo/Mosley.

I'd say that Mayweather finished stronger, but Cotto had more success throughout the fight. The votes being pretty even make sense.

Both fighters won convincingly, but Bradley hardly had any success (even though he carried himself well in the ring)... whereas Cotto did. Pacquiao had the more convincing win (I felt sorry for Bradley in that fight, didn't feel as sorry for Cotto).

I had Pac winning 8-4 and can't understand how anyone had Tim winning. But manny wasn't a victim of any expectations. Bob fixed this to make himself more money in the event manny leaves to fight floyd. Manny may have been in on it but the decision had nothing to do with manny failing to meet expectations. The general trend has been "oh he knocked that guy down for the 3rd time in his career but didn't finish him off, so he had a poor showing/Oh he didn't knock that guy down, so he lost". Mayweather isn't held to that kind of standard. Saturday, Pac was a victim of judge expectations (apparently). Heck, the judging could've been a continued retaliation from expectation of Pacquiao against Marquez just as much as it could've been a rematch ploy by Bob Arum. Why would you feel Manny is in on it? That said, rematch ploy by Bob Arum would make sense, one scenario: :canada://tin foil hat alert//:canada: They thought Bradley was going to make it a closer fight than it actually ended up being and so the judges were told to score it as they did ahead of time (couldn't communicate with eachother during the fight so they stuck to their gameplan). However, the fight ended up being so one-sided that it screwed up their plans and made the decision just look rediculous. Ticket masters are saying the rematch won't sell because Bradley lost and ESPN is (informally) calling for a boycott of ppv etc. which has forced Bob Arum to try and grand stand in the hopes that this heat dies down and commercial interest resurfaces.

In a situation like this I ask myself who benefits the most from the scenario that happened? IMO its: 1. ARum-rematches, more fights in anaround 140/147 that he would control, more money for him, new name should manny leave TR 2. Manny-rep intact, trilogy potential with Bradley, JMM 4 ight option, increased sympathy from fans, doesn't have to fight floyd to get paid, lack of anger at decision, hasn't said he will leave TR 3. HBO-corporate partner with TR, replay ratings This has been a win for manny despite losing on judges scorecards. I'm sure if he knew this would happen he'd do whatever Bob said do. I just hope he isn't involved. That's an interesting point and always possible, though Pac/JMM4 was always on the table after 3. I don't think boxing could be scripted that well for all of it to be planned in advance. If anything it was designed to hurt Manny's rep and raise Bradley, but it backfired when Manny delivered a dominating performance. Because of that, I doubt he was involved. Bradley came off as a much more challenging foe for Pacman than he actually ended up being (and he was legitimately expected to be more challenging for Pacquiao's style). That's why the outcry is practically universal. Bradley was out of his league and everyone from Mayweather Sr. to Holyfield felt the fight wasn't even close.

Pacquiao's loss proves that he has the highest expectations in the sport. Pac can't win a simple points decision anymore (even as the defending champion)... not unless he drops the fighter in question, or batters him to the point of massive deformation (or causes a stoppage). Mayweather doesn't have those kind of expectations to live up to. He can coast to a points decision and throw low volumes of punches without being questioned or accused of slipping. That earns Pac #1 P4P in my book.

WHat about the JMM fight? Marquez's face was deformed by swelling... and even then, many think Manny didn't do enough to win (even when he outlanded and outworked Marquez and chased him around the ring). Pac's expectations have risen even higher since then. It's not Manny's fault that his opponents run from him... lol nvm, I guess it is. He's just that good.^^

I'd say let Mayweather serve out the rest of his sentence on house arrest IF he comes to terms with Pacquiao for their match BEFORE he leaves (and both sign the contract). Time's running out for both fighters.:boxing:

This isn't a movie. I know, but if he wants house arrest, he should atleast do some pre-settled "community service":boxing: They can make sure he's properly fed (or has the opportunity to be) without Floyd ever leaving jail.

I give it an A. Pac could've used that overhand right more often (if he even used it in this fight) and increased his pressure flurries when he had Bradley hurt. It's too bad that Pacquiao doesn't fight to "destroy" people anymore like he used to... but if Roach can coax that mindset back out of him, I'd give it an A+.

If May on house arrest, how can he fight? The fight would take place after his sentence is served out. He'd just be able to train/stay in shape in the meantime. lol...Bob Arum would be even less likely to help make the fight happen if it meant Floyd would get out of jail early. lol, probably. But all-considered, it makes the most business sense for Arum. Bradley can keep Pac's belt for a longer period of time while Mayweather/Pacquiao happens during a time that it's still a viable fight. Pac can then end his career in either a trilogy against Mayweather, rematch w/Bradley, or in a 4th fight against Marquez. Bob Arum makes money either way.

A one legged one to boot. Pac gave him that one leg (inadvertently) and Bradley called Pac out at 147. So lets put that to rest right now^^.:boxing:

The only real difference I saw in 150 Cotto was his technique. He paced himself better and bounced around more (which is good for cardio). I don't really see a "new" Cotto after he avenged himself against Margarito. I saw the eye Pacquiao damaged being what caused the stoppage.

I never saw Cotto as a good challenge for Pacquiao or Mayweather. His style will always get him in trouble.

Cotto's style and speed would lose against Pacman at any weight. He's as weak to uppercuts as ever (Pac exposed this in round 4 of their fight and Mayweather in the later rounds). It'd be a competitive fight, but Pac would win it.

Agreed, everyone knows he's afraid to face Manny. Styles make fights. And his demands/excuses say it all.

He tends to only unload when he's hurt or angry... something that hasn't happened in a long time.

Juan Manuel Marquez Evander Holyfield Lenox Lewis Floyd Mayweather Sr. Ricky Hatton Oscar De La Hoya Tito Ortiz Dana White ESPN HBO RING (Magazine/Bible of Boxing) All felt this fight wasn't even close... Pacquiao dominated.

Well.. Ariza did trash Arum. In that light, it was almost to be expected.

Pac/Marquez and Pac/Bradley are not comparable. Pac/Marquez was competitive and close. Pac/Bradley was almost a shutout.

“I was in total control (of the fight),” said Pacquiao. “Fact is, in the 10th round, I’ve been winking to the HBO people because I know Bradley can’t beat me anymore.” -Pacquiao http://sports.inquirer.net/48593/pac...radley-rematch It wasn't even close. Total 1-sided victory by Manny Pacquiao. There's really no reason to face Bradley again except to just punish him.:boxing:

A petition to overturn Pac/Bradley's decision has begun... http://www.mp8.ph/news/pacquiao-petition-gains-momentum/16992 http://www.change.org/petitions/the-governor-of-nv-overturn-judges-decision-regarding-pacquiao-bradley-bout :boxing:

The only real effect is a big PPV fight so closely following Mayweather's PPV. Usually there's 2 big fights a year. Having them back-to-back would hurt Pac/Bradley's numbers more than anything else.

I'd love to hear your definition of effective aggression and ring generalship. If a fighter not only outlands, but also lands the harder shots and forces a normally forward-coming fighter to retreat... is that not effective aggression and ring generalship? Pacquiao always comes forward, that's a dominant trait. Pacquiao rarely pins anyone to the ropes (but did get Bradley into the corner). I still fail to see how getting someone in a corner/against the ropes proves something regarding effective aggression or ring generalship (Mayweather gets driven to corners all the time). I also fail to see how Bradley could control any pace when tactically retreating from Pacquiao (who, as you said, always comes forward). Pac tee'd off on Bradley while Bradley tried to dodge with head movement (unsuccessfully). And naturally, the only way Manny could win was to chase Bradley around the ring and land shots (because Bradley no longer wished to engage toe-to-toe like he initially promised). Pac was the aggressor.

Silly rabbits... http://cdn1.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1088986/145984337_extra_large.jpg A pic where Pac actually flexes makes a difference... (Pac can still lose this fight though, so don't worry nervous anti-Packers... there's still a chance :usa:)

Pac was playing with Bradley (and smiling at the announcers) in this fight. It was that one-sided for Pacquiao. Bradley tried to act slick with his head movement but he still got caught quite often despite that. Bradley had no answer. Pacquiao was constantly outlanding him... and landing the bigger shots... and being the aggressor/walking him down. This fight wasn't even close. EDIT: Btw, those watching with the sound off are not doing themselves any favors. Sounds will help you see hits that may look like they missed but actually landed.. Watch it with sound and ignore the commentary.

I'll post this here to help spice up the thread: http://cdn1.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1088986/145984337_extra_large.jpg

pacquiao was not the effective aggressor or the ring general I'd love to hear your definition of effective aggression and ring generalship. If a fighter not only outlands, but also lands the harder shots and forces a normally forward-coming fighter to retreat... is that not effective aggression and ring generalship?

Well he was stupid then,instead of winking he should have been fighting..I'm sure that was the first half of the rd which he gave away and made him lose the rd and many others..Pac admitted his stupidity... Hard to give away a round when the challenger doesn't take advantage. You can say Pac eased up all you want but Bradley did nothing about it. I don't even want to begin to think of what you must've thought regarding Canelo/Mosley, lol. Did Mosley win that too because Canelo gave up "the first half of the rd"? Come on now...

@Sammy2g3, How do you define "controlling the round with the jab"? EDIT: Nvm, you say it's a close round while saying it looked like Pac was going to knock Bradley out? Yeah.... Okay, lol thanks for your input. :usa: