Bradley's KO% is %39.29 & he is Pacs next opponent? This is NOT a good fight!

[jrosales13]

This disagreement can merely be explained by 1 simple thing... You don't know wut it means to have a STYLISTIC ADVANTAGE. Look it up

Why don't you tell me what it means. And, then tell me how that fit in Ortiz-Floyd situation.

[Bombs]

Bradley is a tough opponent due to his active style but Pacquiaos power is simply too much for anyone in the sport to handle.

[JDezi4]

Why don't you tell me what it means. And, then tell me how that fit in Ortiz-Floyd situation.

Well, brawlers beat boxers, punchers beat brawlers, boxers beat punchers. No this isn't a triangle theory, its just the average idealization made by boxing historians in the past. I'm not sure the exact situation in which this theory stemmed, but the 1 that was used when I learned about it was Frazier > Ali, Foreman > Frazier, Ali > Foreman...

Ortiz (when used properly) is a brawler which gives him a stylistic advantage over Mayweather, the boxer... Don't be childish, obviously that's not the be all end all of how a fight will go, so no need to call me names.

It relates to the subject becuz Ortiz, having a stylistic advantage over Floyd, as well as being bigger, stronger (arguably), with devastating punching power and the advantage of youth... And Floyd being a defensive boxer with little punching power, having been out of the ring over a year, as well as being 34 years old (prime years clearly behind him)... PRE-FIGHT, its compelling.

On the other hand, the Elite A+ class p4p champion is not the fighter with the stylistic disadvantage like Floyd was in the Ortiz fight... Just the opposite. Manny (the superior Elite lever fighter) is the brawler (I know wut ur thinking, but keep ur shorts on), and Bradley is the boxer. Add that with the fact that Bradley isn't significantly bigger than Manny, nor faster, nor better footwork or general athleticism, nor more punching power (or any punching power), or really any advantages other than youth and a crazy rock hard head....

Combine that with him being a fairly boring fighter, not coming off a significant win (he'll beat Casa, but not in any spectacular way... If he KO's Casa, than Bob paid Casa to take a dive #markmywords), and is on a list of fighters ducking another fighter.... What's to get exited about?

[JOM'S]

I dont believe that brawlers beat boxers, punchers beat brawlers and boxers beat punchers and lolz at Mayweather having stylistic disadvantage over ortiz hehe ....

anyway most fighters are now hybrids, the elite fighters even more so, IMHO both PAC and Floyd are boxer puncher, manny more of a power puncher, floyd more of a defensive boxer, days of manny being a brawler is long gone...

[COACH WEBB]

Bradley is a tough opponent due to his active style but Pacquiaos power is simply too much for anyone in the sport to handle.

Come on now, anyone?

[jrosales13]

Well, brawlers beat boxers, punchers beat brawlers, boxers beat punchers. No this isn't a triangle theory, its just the average idealization made by boxing historians in the past. I'm not sure the exact situation in which this theory stemmed, but the 1 that was used when I learned about it was Frazier > Ali, Foreman > Frazier, Ali > Foreman...

Ortiz (when used properly) is a brawler which gives him a stylistic advantage over Mayweather, the boxer... Don't be childish, obviously that's not the be all end all of how a fight will go, so no need to call me names.

It relates to the subject becuz Ortiz, having a stylistic advantage over Floyd, as well as being bigger, stronger (arguably), with devastating punching power and the advantage of youth... And Floyd being a defensive boxer with little punching power, having been out of the ring over a year, as well as being 34 years old (prime years clearly behind him)... PRE-FIGHT, its compelling.

On the other hand, the Elite A+ class p4p champion is not the fighter with the stylistic disadvantage like Floyd was in the Ortiz fight... Just the opposite. Manny (the superior Elite lever fighter) is the brawler (I know wut ur thinking, but keep ur shorts on), and Bradley is the boxer. Add that with the fact that Bradley isn't significantly bigger than Manny, nor faster, nor better footwork or general athleticism, nor more punching power (or any punching power), or really any advantages other than youth and a crazy rock hard head....

Combine that with him being a fairly boring fighter, not coming off a significant win (he'll beat Casa, but not in any spectacular way... If he KO's Casa, than Bob paid Casa to take a dive #markmywords), and is on a list of fighters ducking another fighter.... What's to get exited about?

And, when one is a boxer/puncher? What is JMM? A boxer?

Stylistically Ortiz never brought anything to the table that could have possibly trouble Floyd. The only advantage Ortiz had was size/age/ and hoping that Floyd was rusty...But, he had no stylistic advantage.

[SplitSecond]

Well, brawlers beat boxers, punchers beat brawlers, boxers beat punchers. No this isn't a triangle theory, its just the average idealization made by boxing historians in the past. I'm not sure the exact situation in which this theory stemmed, but the 1 that was used when I learned about it was Frazier > Ali, Foreman > Frazier, Ali > Foreman...

Ortiz (when used properly) is a brawler which gives him a stylistic advantage over Mayweather, the boxer... Don't be childish, obviously that's not the be all end all of how a fight will go, so no need to call me names.

It relates to the subject becuz Ortiz, having a stylistic advantage over Floyd, as well as being bigger, stronger (arguably), with devastating punching power and the advantage of youth... And Floyd being a defensive boxer with little punching power, having been out of the ring over a year, as well as being 34 years old (prime years clearly behind him)... PRE-FIGHT, its compelling.

On the other hand, the Elite A+ class p4p champion is not the fighter with the stylistic disadvantage like Floyd was in the Ortiz fight... Just the opposite. Manny (the superior Elite lever fighter) is the brawler (I know wut ur thinking, but keep ur shorts on), and Bradley is the boxer. Add that with the fact that Bradley isn't significantly bigger than Manny, nor faster, nor better footwork or general athleticism, nor more punching power (or any punching power), or really any advantages other than youth and a crazy rock hard head....

Combine that with him being a fairly boring fighter, not coming off a significant win (he'll beat Casa, but not in any spectacular way... If he KO's Casa, than Bob paid Casa to take a dive #markmywords), and is on a list of fighters ducking another fighter.... What's to get exited about?

at first i was like "OMG someone who knows boxing" but then you said pacquiao was a brawler and i thought "wht...the, ****..."

[jrosales13]

What about a swarmer? Or do they go down as a brawler?

[SplitSecond]

And, when one is a boxer/puncher? What is JMM? A boxer?

Stylistically Ortiz never brought anything to the table that could have possibly trouble Floyd. The only advantage Ortiz had was size/age/ and hoping that Floyd was rusty...But, he had no stylistic advantage.

those are just the "basic" boxing styles, you can't just throw a fighter into those categories alot of the time

but, the best examples are as the guy before said, foreman - slugger, fraizer-brawler and ali-boxer

slugger = low output fighter who looks to just land one big shot
brawler = inside fighter
boxer = outside fighter

[Elotero]

I complain that Manny isnt fighting the best available...Mayweather is ready to fight....why are you fighting Margarito? Clottey? Mosley? JMM for the 3rd time...and now Bradley who hasnt doen **** at WW?..where is his belt? What is he ranked @WW.....?

I get this vibe too. He has 1 fight at WW and to top it off Bradley is coming off a serious inactivity pocket.

He is the prime choice opponent because he is: Young, Black, undefeated, and comes with the handicap of inactivity.