Tim Bradley has a better resume than Ward, Calzaghe, Canelo,Cotto, and many others..

[JK1700]

Ward and Cotto had a better career? Ok......explain how. Go! PPV isn't something to that should be added to greatness by the way.

I'm waiting on good explanations so please enlighten me. Some people thought Pac lost vs Bradley. I disagree but the win is there. People thought Ward lost to Kovalev the first fight and Cotto losing to Mosley. It works both ways.




I knew that. Doesn't change the fact that others don't agree with the fights and their outcome. Some dudes that know their **** even had Bradley winning. I have to respect that even if I disagree but they gave a good explanation why. Something that I haven't seen in this thread as to how Ward, Cotto, Canelo, Calzaghe, and others have done better with their wins.

You and many say Bradley lost vs Pac but yet I've been saying many thought Ward lost to Kovalev the first time. Many thought Cotto lost to Mosley. Many thought Canelo lost to Golovkin(another that Bradley has a better resume). You can't have your cake and eat it too.

I mean, I think it's pretty obvious and I never thought someone would really make this argument. For a start Cotto has had 21 fights against world champions while Bradley has 13. I thought Bradley lost 4 times but even if you're gonna say he only lost to Pacquiao he would still have 3 losses. Cotto has 5 losses, but fought way more top guys in 4 different weight divisions. Bradley fought in 2 divisions. If he fought guys like Mosley, Margarito with loaded gloves, Mayweather, and went up to 154 and fought top guys there then he'd have a lot more than 5 losses. Easily. Obviously. Not to mention Cotto's career lasted 5 more years than his.

Ward cleaned out a whole division and dominated all the top guys in it. Then went up to 175 and beat the top guy there twice. That's like the equivalent of Bradley beating the top guy at 147 back to back (He beat the #2 guy in a decision so controversial he got death threats, then lost to him the next 2 times). Bradley was the champ at 140 but he didn't "clean it out" plus he didn't give rematches when he had close fights (Provodnikov, Marquez). I got nothing against Bradley always thought he was a very good tough fighter but nothing truly special. Put it this way, Ward fought several top guys like Kessler, Froch, Dawson, Abraham and completely dominated these guys. It wasn't even a fight he made easy work of them. Bradley had several good wins but when he fought top guys he struggled obviously Pacquiao, Marquez there's nothing wrong with struggling with them but Chavez, Provodnikov, Kendall Holt? Like really? These guys were all very tough fights for him. If he was really great they would've been easy.

Of course everyone has fights where they struggled a bit nothing wrong with that and we can debate them endlessly so there's no point doing that. Ward struggled with Kovalev then beat him in the rematch. Bradley struggled with guys then didn't give them rematches or lost handily (Pacquiao). He probably does have a better resume than Canelo at this point but so what? Canelo is just entering his prime and probably will still be fighting in 8 years time.

Tim was a very good fighter but I was shocked he retired so early, when there's lots of top guys at WW he could have fought to enhance this debate. I feel like the Pacquiao fans are overrating him a lot because I had this same debate a month or so ago. I'd have liked to see Ward stick around longer too but that's not the point. I just can't put him above Cotto or Ward in any way. Cotto's career was a lot more thorough and Ward was the undisputed king of two divisions. Plus if we're talking skills I think Cotto would've beat him prime for prime and to compare their skills i'd have to say Andre was way more skilled. Better jab, ring IQ, everything.

Not hating on him I just have to give more credit to those guys.

[b00g13man]

[mani1]

Devon wasn't on a high at the time Bradley fought him because he was coming of a disgraceful gift against Kotelnik.

[Elroy The Great]

Bradley is best known for ducking Khan in the most public duck in recorded history where he admitted on a live radio show that Khan (who was seen as number 1 or 2 in the division at the time) was too risky a fight to take. It was a duck that was only matched by Floyd ducking Khan when Khan won the public poll and Floyd decided to fight the loser of the poll, and someone Khan had already beaten - Maidana.

whatever company makes ring canvases should sign khan for an endorsement, he spends so much time down there

[Thraxox]

this guy

The idiot said Maidana when it was Maidana that pulled out...... TWICE

[HarvardBlue]

Bradley has 2 "good" wins and one was extremely controversial. Ward, Calzaghe, Canelo, and Cotto have better wins and even losses that's better than Alexander and Peterson.

I don't get the purpose of the thread except to make people pull sh_t out of their a$$es to shoot down a pretty random claim.

[mani1]

And across the mountains of the United Kingdoms the name echoed. Prescott.... Prescott.... Prescott............. Prescott........................... Prescott.......................................... ........






..............Julio Diaz.............

The guy Porter needed the judges help to even get a draw and then barely beat him when he was shot to **** lol.

[Sheldon312]

timmy imho is rated just right. a solid -b level guy. he never did anything special.

Point exactly

[Mr.Fantastic]

You can't compare any of those fights to Pacquaio-Bradley because literally 1% of media and fans had Bradley winning.

Bradley's resume isn't even that good let alone better than some of those names you mentioned.

I can compare, it was losses that should of gone the other way but didn't. Ward shouldn't have won vs Kovalev the first time. Majority of people thought Kovalev beat Ward.

You're exaggerating with 1%, many more than 1% thought Bradley beat Pac. Go look at some of the threads here for starters from that time. It was way more than 1%, even excluding the trolls.

Dude, I don't know that.

An extremely small % of people on this site and in general had Bradley winning.

Substationally smaller than any example used above.

If you want to consider the "win" for Bradley legitimate then that's on you but don't expect other to include one of the biggest robberies of all time on a guy's resume.

That's not true, there was more than an extremely small percentage. So you agree that Floyd lost to Castillo the first time? Public opinion thought he lost.
What about Kovalev vs Ward the first time? Same deal with public opinion.

Like I stated before, Oscar should've won vs Tito and Mosley but in the end, the losses are still there in his record. Talk boxing with Tito and Mosley fans, they will put the Oscar win as one of the biggest on their records. Sucks but it's done.

Not a single ranking list even moved Bradley above Pacquaio after that fight let alone Floyd.

You're exaggerating again. As a Bradley fan, I saw some that did count it. I can go look for it but it's time consuming so you're going to have to take my word for it.

I mean, I think it's pretty obvious and I never thought someone would really make this argument. For a start Cotto has had 21 fights against world champions while Bradley has 13. I thought Bradley lost 4 times but even if you're gonna say he only lost to Pacquiao he would still have 3 losses. Cotto has 5 losses, but fought way more top guys in 4 different weight divisions. Bradley fought in 2 divisions. If he fought guys like Mosley, Margarito with loaded gloves, Mayweather, and went up to 154 and fought top guys there then he'd have a lot more than 5 losses. Easily. Obviously. Not to mention Cotto's career lasted 5 more years than his.

Ward cleaned out a whole division and dominated all the top guys in it. Then went up to 175 and beat the top guy there twice. That's like the equivalent of Bradley beating the top guy at 147 back to back (He beat the #2 guy in a decision so controversial he got death threats, then lost to him the next 2 times). Bradley was the champ at 140 but he didn't "clean it out" plus he didn't give rematches when he had close fights (Provodnikov, Marquez). I got nothing against Bradley always thought he was a very good tough fighter but nothing truly special. Put it this way, Ward fought several top guys like Kessler, Froch, Dawson, Abraham and completely dominated these guys. It wasn't even a fight he made easy work of them. Bradley had several good wins but when he fought top guys he struggled obviously Pacquiao, Marquez there's nothing wrong with struggling with them but Chavez, Provodnikov, Kendall Holt? Like really? These guys were all very tough fights for him. If he was really great they would've been easy.

Of course everyone has fights where they struggled a bit nothing wrong with that and we can debate them endlessly so there's no point doing that. Ward struggled with Kovalev then beat him in the rematch. Bradley struggled with guys then didn't give them rematches or lost handily (Pacquiao). He probably does have a better resume than Canelo at this point but so what? Canelo is just entering his prime and probably will still be fighting in 8 years time.

Tim was a very good fighter but I was shocked he retired so early, when there's lots of top guys at WW he could have fought to enhance this debate. I feel like the Pacquiao fans are overrating him a lot because I had this same debate a month or so ago. I'd have liked to see Ward stick around longer too but that's not the point. I just can't put him above Cotto or Ward in any way. Cotto's career was a lot more thorough and Ward was the undisputed king of two divisions. Plus if we're talking skills I think Cotto would've beat him prime for prime and to compare their skills i'd have to say Andre was way more skilled. Better jab, ring IQ, everything.

Not hating on him I just have to give more credit to those guys.

I thought many have lost in fights that may of gone the other way. You guys still keep trying to dog on Bradley's resume while not having the same standards for the others. Cotto may of fought Mosley, Margarito, and Mayweather but he still lost to two and there are people that thought he lost to Mosley. You guys just want to have your cake and eat it too by just discrediting Bradley and not the other guys. Have the same standards all around. Take away Pac from Bradley, you take away Mosley from Cotto, Kovalev from Ward, and so on. We're just going to go around in circles.

WARD DID NOT CLEAN OUT A WHOLE DIVISION. Jesus that's one of the biggest piles of bullshit in boxing. Did Ward beat Bute? No! Did Ward beat Dirrell? No! He could've but both of them chose to not fight each other. You're saying Bradley lost to Pac in a bull**** decision but don't include Ward with Kovalev on the first fight. Like I said, you're going back to only an unfair standard.

Bradley won more rounds in one fight vs Pac than Margarito and Cotto combined when they fought him. He may not be special but he was above the majority of boxers. Ward didn't fight Dawson nor Abraham at their best but I still count his wins over them.

Bradley has a better resume than all the guys I mentioned based on wins on his records. Records are facts.

Bradley accomplished more and will accomplish more than the current stock of WWs. Most boxers these days only want to get paid for tune ups. That's why I don't see it. Maybe Crawford and Spence have a chance.

FYI Ward wasn't undisputed in any of his weights. Fantasy fights aren't a metric to gauge for a boxer's greatness.

Devon wasn't on a high at the time Bradley fought him because he was coming of a disgraceful gift against Kotelnik.

Devon was pretty high. Yet again, the reason why it took a hit was because Bradley outclassed him and Devon went out like a chump.

Bradley has 2 "good" wins and one was extremely controversial. Ward, Calzaghe, Canelo, and Cotto have better wins and even losses that's better than Alexander and Peterson.

I don't get the purpose of the thread except to make people pull sh_t out of their a$$es to shoot down a pretty random claim.

Yet again I see the same thing. Talking about controversial but forget Ward had one, Calzaghe had another, Canelo did too, and even Cotto.

I'm not counting losses, I'm counting wins. None of those have better wins on the A side like Pac/Marquez and some are comparable to Bradley's B side wins like Alexander and Peterson.

[Mr.Fantastic]

Talk about double standards. People don't want to count Bradley's win over Pac but yet they want to count Ward's win over Kovalev, Canelo's draw vs GGG, and Cotto's win over Mosley.

That's because the only way they can have an argument. The records are facts.