Manny Pacquiao Vs Timothy Bradley 2 & Undercards Master Discussion Thread

[jas]

[jas]

[jas]

Credit where its due - Bradley is super tough mentally.

[poeticlsykuac]

really.......how can you take that interview seriously????
which one of you stormtroopers was interviewing him
comedy......the same replay of the only 3 punches he landedseriously??..
I think he lands 3 punches in my sig....
Damn, you guys are getting desperate at least Tim was trying to keep it real, but that guy interviewing him....WTF?those was the most biased, BS questions ever.
Do you guys really believe people think Pac won because HBO made it sound like he did?

Absolutely.... I was one of them. I initially thought Pac beat him down.... because I was "seeing" what they were "saying." Now I can agree with it being a tight win for Pac (with your analysis).... but I simply don't think this was a wide margin of fight... it was a toss up of a fight.

But then it become important to think of guys like Whitaker.... who always had to out punch and move with punches, by thoughts like that Whitaker usually being the weaker puncher should have never really won a fight... That's my issue with the stronger punch bs.... and seeing how many rounds that "pac stole" just killed simply because heavily biased video exposed so many of those "stolen" rounds as not at all stolen after all there was a ton of misses.

The thing is people just hear "oh and three straight rights" so they assume they saw that because an expert told them. This is how our brains work, it isn't "seeing is believing" it's "believing is seeing." Many deception tests have been ran, and show how often people assume things based off of an "authorities" review. A lot of people roll with the commentary, because they are fans of the commentary. Read Robert Ciadini's book Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion fantastic book... that will give you a good example how easily we are persuaded.... but there are several other books too that show examples of this behavior.

People are and will always be persuaded by "experts" even if it's because they hate his opinion they go against it.

Just because a punch touched him doesn't mean it was a scoring on him. Rolling your jaw with the punch so that your head doesn't absorb any power is a defensive tactic that you get points for if the judges spot that the punch didn't actually touch them... They were right next to the ring, and could hear if a punch landed as well as see..... Just some thoughts.

[jas]

I'm sorry but on two of the three official judges scorecards, Pac lost to the hungrier fighter. Plain and simple Bradley wanted the fight more. Manny has no one to blame for this loss but himself.

Had he been a bit busier, landed more of those effective combination/accurate punches that he landed throughout much of the fight or even knock down or out Bradley; Especially down the stretch. Then perhaps he would have been given the nod; Given that he was ahead on points all three judges scorecards by the middle rounds of that fight.

However, according to the official judges, he just didn't do enough to justify winning the fight. He was simply outworked and out hustled by the volume punching Bradley. In my opinion, Pac was mostly fighting in counter punching mode, by allowing Tim to get his punches off first and then fighting back in spurts, by backing him up with flurries, in order to win certain rounds.

However, to Pac's credit he has agreed that perhaps he hadn't done enough to secure the win and has promised to become more active and aggressive in the rematch.

[champion4ever]

Work rate a volume doesn't mean crap if you don't land, why can't Bradley fans admit nothing supports his victory?

Also, Pacquaio won the exchanges, but the fact you give Bradley credit for getting beaten in these exchanges but not getting majorly hurt is laughable. So you get points for getting punched on the chin and standing up to it? Everyone should fight like Chavez Jr. then...

Another person who believes Bradley could've won is exposed as an idiot. You're essentially doing what one of the judges did and negatively effecting his scoring 'because he isn't knocking Bradley out' like he did to everyone else... how lame.

I'm sorry but on two of the three official judges scorecards, Pac lost to the hungrier fighter. Plain and simple Bradley wanted the fight more. Manny has no one to blame for this loss but himself.

Had he been a bit busier, landed more of those effective combination/accurate punches that he landed throughout much of the fight or even knock down or out Bradley; Especially down the stretch. Then perhaps he would have been given the nod; Given that he was ahead on points on all three judges scorecards by the middle rounds of that fight.

However, according to the official judges, he just didn't do enough to justify winning the fight. He was simply outworked and out hustled by the volume punching Bradley. In my opinion, Pac was mostly fighting in counter punching mode, by allowing Tim to get his punches off first and then fighting back in spurts, by backing him up with flurries, in order to win certain rounds.

However, to Pac's credit he has agreed that perhaps he hadn't had done enough in order to secure the win and has promised to become more active and aggressive with his punches in the rematch.

[champion4ever]

Thanks for proving my point that Bradley was the busier and more active puncher. He nearly threw 100 more punches than Pac. I've always said that Pac was the more accurate puncher. Moreover, I've stated that the judges probably favored Bradley's due to his punch volume/work rate activity over Pac's punching accuracy where he landed more. So once again thanks for proving my point.

[T18Z]

I'm sorry but on two of the three official judges scorecards, Pac lost to the hungrier fighter. Plain and simple Bradley wanted the fight more. Manny has no one to blame for this loss but himself.

Had he been a bit busier, landed more of those effective combination/accurate punches that he landed throughout much of the fight or even knock down or out Bradley; Especially down the stretch. Then perhaps he would have been given the nod; Given that he was ahead on points on all three judges scorecards by the middle rounds of that fight.

However, according to the official judges, he just didn't do enough to justify winning the fight. He was simply outworked and out hustled by the volume punching Bradley. In my opinion, Pac was mostly fighting in counter punching mode, by allowing Tim to get his punches off first and then fighting back in spurts, by backing him up with flurries, in order to win certain rounds.

However, to Pac's credit he has agreed that perhaps he hadn't had done enough in order to secure the win and has promised to become more active and aggressive with his punches in the rematch.

You mean the 5 world class judges who reviewed the fight and all had Pacquaio winning unanimously? Also Pacquaio has never admitted he didn't do enough to win dumbo, he said he was compassionate towards Bradley as the fight progressed because he was getting outclassed, BIG DIFFERENCE.

All signs point to Pacquaio winning, you are not a genius, you do not know better than 99.9% of the world, stop being an idiot.

[jas]

Thanks for proving my point that Bradley was the busier and more active puncher. He nearly threw 100 more punches than Pac. I've always said that Pac was the more accurate puncher. Moreover, I've stated that the judges probably favored Bradley's due to his punch volume/work rate activity over Pac's punching accuracy where he landed more. So once again thanks for proving my point.

I got a simple yes or no answer question for you. Failure to answer in Yes or No will result in automatic defeat in the debate, complete loss of credibility as a poster and severe repercussions as to how posters view you from a respect standpoint.

Now here we go....

I would rather land 100 punches more than my opponent as opposed to throwing 100 punches more than him. Do you agree? Remember, 1 word answer of yes or no .

[T18Z]

Thanks for proving my point that Bradley was the busier and more active puncher. He nearly threw 100 more punches than Pac. I've always said that Pac was the more accurate puncher. Moreover, I've stated that the judges probably favored Bradley's due to his punch volume/work rate activity over Pac's punching accuracy where he landed more. So once again thanks for proving my point.

He threw 100 more and landed 100 less, damn your ****** man. You don't get points for missing punches and wobbling around the ring. No fcking legit judge is going to score a fight to a guy who is throwing and missing, when compared to someone landing 100 more fricken punches, most being power shots... jeeze, use your damn brain.