[Grantland] Will Boxing Ever Forgive Tim Bradley?

[S. Saddler 1310]

It's cause most did perceive it as a whitewash. In that sense it was like Rios Abril or Casa JASC, and nothing like JMM 3 which had an almost even split.

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Ma...imothy_Bradley

actually, most people thought JMM got robbed blind in the third fight with Pac. there was a huge uproar on these forums about it. fighters on twitter were talking about a robbery the same way they did after Bradley-Pac. guys like Hagler (a Pac supporter) thought Pac clearly lost to JMM.

i didn't agree with that, either. i saw a close fight in both instances, Pac-JMM III and Bradley-Pac.

[HeroBando]

Same people who condemn Bradley for the Pac decision are the same people who defend Pac in the Marquez decisions.

Not freaking up to them, all they did was fight. Acting like they filled out the scorecards

Again, none of the Pac JMM fights were perceived as one side, like the Bradley fight. Check out that link above. Even Floyd Cotto apparently looked closer ringside:

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Fl...._Miguel_Cotto

[Hougigo]

Again, none of the Pac JMM fights were perceived as one side, like the Bradley fight. Check out that link above. Even Floyd Cotto apparently looked closer ringside:

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Fl...._Miguel_Cotto

So since people percieved the fight as one sided it's still okay to blame Bradley for the decision? Still not making sense

[HeroBando]

actually, most people thought JMM got robbed blind in the third fight with Pac. there was a huge uproar on these forums about it. fighters on twitter were talking about a robbery the same way they did after Bradley-Pac. guys like Hagler (a Pac supporter) thought Pac clearly lost to JMM.

i didn't agree with that, either. i saw a close fight in both instances, Pac-JMM III and Bradley-Pac.

You'll see an even split on press row cards, a textbook draw:

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Ma..._(3rd_meeting)

The uproar was due to JMM being a huge underdog for the first time, and overperforming a lot. He's also pretty much universally liked (even by Pac fans) and morally deserved at least one win out of the 3. But all 3 could have gone either way, as ringside scores will show.

[HeroBando]

So since people percieved the fight as one sided it's still okay to blame Bradley for the decision? Still not making sense

Not at all, just not liking the JMM parallel. Though you know every guy that wins in a big time robbery carries that stigma that for while. Bradley got it worse cause it was so high profile, and cause it was so hard to understand, being perceived as not close.

[Hougigo]

Not at all, just not liking the JMM parallel. Though you know every guy that wins in a big time robbery carries that stigma that for while. Bradley got it worse cause it was so high profile, and cause it was so hard to understand, being perceived as not close.

I used the JMM parallel because so many people blame Pac for that and constantly bring it up. I guess I could have used Matthysse/Alexander, Broner/Ponce off the top of my head. But more people would probably take that and say it was home cooking.
People actually think Bradley took the judges scorecards and wrote the scores in himself, which is ******ed.

[Augustane]

I don't hate Bradley. I'm disappointed in him for wasting the last year of his career looking for paydays while he sat on the shelf. His win over Pacquiao wasn't legitimate in the eyes of the boxing public. He should have recognised that and did more to pursue fan friendly fights instead of waiting it out for a payday only to fight an unknown Russian anyway.

Other than that I hope he looks good tomorrow and starts fighting some world class opponents soon.

Exactly this right here.

He kept looking for big fights and allowed his ego to be bloated by the win. Had he accepted that the general public disagreed with the decision and that he wasn't 'really' considered a upper-echelon fighter, his stock wouldn't have taken such a dive. It was his ****iness post-fight and insistence that he won that drove people off.

To be honest, that 147 belt is worthless, since nobody feels that he earned it anyway. He should go back down to 140 and legitimately win a belt, since that's where the big fish are these days, who would be more than willing to take a bite out of Bradley.

[S. Saddler 1310]

You'll see an even split on press row cards, a textbook draw:

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Ma..._(3rd_meeting)

The uproar was due to JMM being a huge underdog for the first time, and overperforming a lot. He's also pretty much universally liked (even by Pac fans) and morally deserved at least one win out of the 3. But all 3 could have gone either way, as ringside scores will show.

i could counter-argue, re. the uproar after Bradley-Pacquiao, that Bradley was (not necessarily universally disliked, but) considered a marketing nonentity and that there was no economic benefit to the industry in him winning a decision over one of the sport's two main cash-cows (and certainly not while so many in that industry still held out hope of seeing a lucrative Mayweather-Pacquiao clash appear).

sportswriters and their outlets are a part of the industry also - they, too, stand to benefit economically from certain outcomes and can be influenced by this. the consensus sometimes happens to be reflective of the truth, but sometimes it's misled - on which side the consensus falls is a matter of compounded circumstantial factors.

so i think it's weak for anyone to state their opinion of who won a fight and then refer to the consensus as chief support of that opinion.

the fight was much closer than the hysterical media uproar would have had one believe.

[HeroBando]

I used the JMM parallel because so many people blame Pac for that and constantly bring it up. I guess I could have used Matthysse/Alexander, Broner/Ponce off the top of my head. But more people would probably take that and say it was home cooking.
People actually think Bradley took the judges scorecards and wrote the scores in himself, which is ******ed.

Gotcha. OT again, but those 2 were also legit close fights. Maybe they were dead clear to some, but basically a 1 round swing and its a draw/other guy wins.

The other thing that doesn't help Timmy's case is this recent trolling in interviews. But that's probably more defensive, he was getting it just as bad without. But might take longer to wear off if you gonna be a jerk. Like, I've never seen Rios or Cloud trying to justify the bad decisions. But again, they didn't get as much backlash in the much lower profile fights, so it's easier to move on.

[DiegoFuego]

Tim Bradley is a devil worshipper. He could never beat anyone with a pulse.