Does Tim Bradley win 1 round vs Mayweather

[djeffectz]

it would be a closer fight then many of you think, Mayweather wins 7-5... Bradley is a good fighter, if he gave Pac problems he would give Mayweather too...

in fact, it will be Mayweather next fight, him and Bradley
the winner will face Pac.

[slackblick]

i'd say he wins three or four. a one-legged bradley won at least four against poochie.

[FeFist]

I wouldn't be surprised if Floyd stopped Bradley. Bradley just doesn't have the tools in his box to beat Mayweather, he is an inferior boxer, his physical build goes against him, he lacks the physical strength and punch power to impose his will against Floyd etc.

The fight would probaly look like the later stages of Floyd v Hatton.

[_original_]

Probably 1-3 rounds imo.

[Brother Jay]

Look, I think Bradley would have given any version of Pacquiao problems, even beat him. The only punch Pacquiao could land was the straight/ sweeping left hand, and Bradley managed to take that punch away from him in the second half. Pacquiao is still on the decline though, his conditioning, foot speed aren't the same and Manny's legs are the most important assets to his style. I've noticed this since the Margarito fight, can't understand why you would deny that

I simply disagree.

If what you say is true, why not just count from the Morales loss then?

Or the Clottey performance?

Or the Mosley match?

Truth is that Pacquiao performances don't look any different. His recent choice of opponents do.

Think about it.

When Morales beat Pacquiao, coincidentally it was at the same time when a lab had lost Manny's blood sample and needed Manny to provide another clean sample WITHOUT NOTICE!!!!

In the rematch, Pacquiao did absolutely NOTHING different, but this time there was no mix up at the lab. Yet Manny dominated Morales with the same approach from the first fight. My point is that Manny's poor performance can be explained if one would consider all that happened.

Same with all three fights with JMM. Aside from the two KO's Manny suffered and his loss to Morales, Manny has never looked so vulnerable as when he stepped in with a skilled boxer like JMM. On three different occasions Marquez showed the world that his skill > Manny's workrate.

Same with Bradley. Bradley tried to match Pacquiao early on and then smartened up halfway through. He nullified Manny's straight left and got the job done. Bradley IMO isn't great or even a very skillful boxer, but he's game .. he's willing .. and most of all he wasn't so stationary that he took any real damage early on so that he'd have to get desperate to win later on.

Pacquiao is not on any decline. Put him in with a drained Alexander and he'll be Mighty Midget again. Its about matchmaking with Manny, not ability.

How do you think Manny all of a sudden went from being a tenacious but limited fighter to this unbelievable conqueror? Its because Roach always made sure to target men at their worst and when that wasn't enough he drained them.

Still disagree?

DLH - loss
Hatton - 1st loss
Cotto - 1st loss
Clottey - nobody
Margarito - KO'd
Mosley - loss & draw

Those were the fights that made people believe that Manny Pacquiao was special. Those 6 fights were all specifically timed so that Manny could meet these men at their low points coming off losses and meaningless tune ups. Two of them involved catchweights.

Now because Manny is fighting winners instead of losers, some of you say he's declining.

I'm calling bullshit.

Again .. Pacquiao looked the exact same way against JMM three times. He looked that way against Morales once he had to be clean. And now that he fought Bradley who was still on top and his jab, jab straight left didn't make him look like he was special, he's automatically on the decline.

And then you wonder why the fucker refused random USADA PED tests for 3 years!!!

So Pacquiao's refusal to take those tests for years and his loss to Morales at a time when he was required to give a clean sample are both coincidences?

*Flavor Flav voice*

Don't believe the hype!

[Bermuda]

I simply disagree.

If what you say is true, why not just count from the Morales loss then?

Or the Clottey performance?

Or the Mosley match?

Truth is that Pacquiao performances don't look any different. His recent choice of opponents do.

Think about it.

When Morales beat Pacquiao, coincidentally it was at the same time when a lab had lost Manny's blood sample and needed Manny to provide another clean sample WITHOUT NOTICE!!!!

In the rematch, Pacquiao did absolutely NOTHING different, but this time there was no mix up at the lab. Yet Manny dominated Morales with the same approach from the first fight. My point is that Manny's poor performance can be explained if one would consider all that happened.

Same with all three fights with JMM. Aside from the two KO's Manny suffered and his loss to Morales, Manny has never looked so vulnerable as when he stepped in with a skilled boxer like JMM. On three different occasions Marquez showed the world that his skill > Manny's workrate.

Same with Bradley. Bradley tried to match Pacquiao early on and then smartened up halfway through. He nullified Manny's straight left and got the job done. Bradley IMO isn't great or even a very skillful boxer, but he's game .. he's willing .. and most of all he wasn't so stationary that he took any real damage early on so that he'd have to get desperate to win later on.

Pacquiao is not on any decline. Put him in with a drained Alexander and he'll be Mighty Midget again. Its about matchmaking with Manny, not ability.

How do you think Manny all of a sudden went from being a tenacious but limited fighter to this unbelievable conqueror? Its because Roach always made sure to target men at their worst and when that wasn't enough he drained them.

Still disagree?

DLH - loss
Hatton - 1st loss
Cotto - 1st loss
Clottey - nobody
Margarito - KO'd
Mosley - loss & draw

Those were the fights that made people believe that Manny Pacquiao was special. Those 6 fights were all specifically timed so that Manny could meet these men at their low points coming off losses and meaningless tune ups. Two of them involved catchweights.

Now because Manny is fighting winners instead of losers, some of you say he's declining.

I'm calling bullshit.

Again .. Pacquiao looked the exact same way against JMM three times. He looked that way against Morales once he had to be clean. And now that he fought Bradley who was still on top and his jab, jab straight left didn't make him look like he was special, he's automatically on the decline.

And then you wonder why the fucker refused random USADA PED tests for 3 years!!!

So Pacquiao's refusal to take those tests for years and his loss to Morales at a time when he was required to give a clean sample are both coincidences?

*Flavor Flav voice*

Don't believe the hype!

actually that's more like...

DLH - coming off a win after losing to floyd..he challenged pac at ww when pac had just fought his first fight at lightweight..

Hatton - coming off a couple of wins..had just stopped malignaggi to win the IBO world title..and pac fought him at his best weight of 140 lbs where he was the lineal champ..

Cotto - coming off a couple of wins (although the win against clottey
was a bit controversial imo)..he was ranked the #2 best ww at the time..

Clottey - had just come off a controversial loss against cotto..he had won the vacant IBf against zab judah before facing cotto, and he was also ranked the#5 best ww at the time that pac faced him..

Margarito - coming off a win after losing to mosley

Mosley - loss & draw

[FeFist]

It's kind of clear that Pacquiao is on the slide, I can understand what you're saying so far as him looking more stellar against certain opposition (body bags like Margarito). However looking at how he was at the height of his career compared to now things are different in that he no longer has the stamina to fight at the same relentless pace and he no longer has the combinations to dart in and out, turning his opponents etc.

Things like not being able to land combinations that's attributed to his opponent selection, I have been telling people for years that it is difficult to land combinations against an opponent that moves because the moment the first shot lands they will back off preventing Manny from planting his feet.

[FeFist]

actually that's more like...

De La Hoya= Win against a no mark.
Hatton= Good win.
Cotto= Good win albeit unconvincing.
Clottey= Controversial loss.
Margarito= Win against a no mark.
Mosley= Loss & Draw.

I fixed it for you.

[Jack Napier]

Floyd's past it, so Tim can win 2-3 rds, but that's all
he gets outclassed in that fight too
he doesn't have the jab, speed, or power to do anything to Floyd

[Bermuda]

I fixed it for you.

yah that's good too..lol