HBO Commentary, Biased/Not Biased: PacVsBradley

[gamefrk]

Oh god did you just call Broner-Molina great? A guy with power dropping down to in weight to fight a blown up lightweight without any power who hasnt fought in a year and a half and was absolutely picked apart in that fight until his corner mercifully stopped it. Please, that fight is beyond terrible

I didn't call it a great fight. It just that after all the talk that Broner did and got schooled by Maidana: I'm interested in how he does from here on, even against lesser opponents. I'd watch the fight just to know if he's still as ****y and arrogant. For me that alone is enough reason to be interested in the fight. Also, sadly all the talking that Broner did made him relevant in the sport, which is why we know him. Compare BronerDiaz to any other undercard fight on PacVsBradley, I think a lot of people people never even knew the guys on the Top Rank undercard.

I'm not calling it a great fight, it's not competitive. But, I'd still prefer it over Top Rank undercards.

[Marleta]

What do you guys have to say about HBO's commentary of this fight? I'd say it was pretty neutral, they weren't biased towards any fighter. Jim Lampley didn't exaggerate the effect of Manny's punches every time he landed one. Huge improvement over the first fight or even a few of the previous Pacquiao fights where Lampley did go overboard with his comments about Pacquiao's punches. Max Kellarman never had to intervene with his comments to keep Lampley or Roy Jones Jr. in check. Definitely an improvement from the commentating team.

I guess we can watch HBO fights with the mute OFF now?

I wanted to make that exact thread yesterday because it was so clear to me that the commentators were completely unbiased. I even had the exact scorecard as Lederman except for 1 round. But that is really strange to me: how do they suddenly seem to tell things exactly the way they happen in the ring while other times, they tell you things that are clearly not happening.

[gamefrk]

I wanted to make that exact thread yesterday because it was so clear to me that the commentators were completely unbiased. I even had the exact scorecard as Lederman except for 1 round. But that is really strange to me: how do they suddenly seem to tell things exactly the way they happen in the ring while other times, they tell you things that are clearly not happening.

My guess is that they've been reading the stuff we've been saying about them here. They've got to have accounts here! If this isn't the case, then props to whosoever brought about this positive change.