Is Andre Ward comparible to Pre-Pacquiao Tim Bradley?

[Jack Napier]

don't see how there's anything alike
aside from people complaining about their headbutts anyway
Ward is much better, and much more of a technician than Bradley
never got people referring to Bradley as slick or a boxer
he's just a tough guy who outworks people

[The Evil 1-2]

I thought you said your assessment of Bradley style had no negative effect on his ranking..Then you turn around and don't give him credit for the Pac fight..When Bradley won the Championship rds clearly...with guess what??A counter punchers style(that had Pac very confused)but you won't see this,I gave you the Witter fight Holt and Alexander fight as examples of Bradley applying pressure to beat and opponent..I also gave you examples of Bradley fighting off the back foot and taking the role as the counter puncher in such fights as Cherry Peterson Pac(although in the Pac fight he could not sustain it for all 12 rds because he hurt his foot)and even the Abregu fight he fought off the back foot until the end of the fight where he kinda started to brawl..

At the end of the day we can have different views on this it's fine..But even pros will attest that Bradley is a well round fighter which is the biggest reason he has made it this far in this sport....

Activate your reading comprehension. Bradley's PRIMARY style; the forward-pressure style that got him to where he is today in the pro rankings IS NOT the style he implemented in the Pac fight. He tried to be the counter-puncher and box from the outside, but COULD'T DO IT EFFECTIVELY because HE DOES NOT HAVE THE SKILL TO DO SO. You need counter-punching acumen and good defense to do that effectively. Ward has these aforementioned skills, which makes any sort of comparison to Bradley futile in nature. His forward-pressure style would have been tailor-made for Pac as I've ALREADY stated to other posters, which is why he probably took the counter-punching route. LET ME REPEAT THOUGH; HE CANNOT APPLY THIS GAMEPLAN EFFECTIVELY BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE THE SKILL OR THE TOOLS.

With our opinions aside, Bradley even describes this forward-pressure style of his with the statement, "WHEN I ACTUALLY TURNED PROFESSIONAL, THAT'S WHEN I HAD TO BECOME A HUNTER...GOING TO THE GUY AS OPPOSE TO BACKING UP...TAKE IT TO THESE GUYS...ROUGH THESE GUYS UP..."

[Rome-By-Ko]

Activate your reading comprehension. Bradley's PRIMARY style; the forward-pressure style that got him to where he is today in the pro rankings IS NOT the style he implemented in the Pac fight. He tried to be the counter-puncher and box from the outside, but COULD'T DO IT EFFECTIVELY because HE DOES NOT HAVE THE SKILL TO DO SO. You need counter-punching acumen and good defense to do that effectively. Ward has these aforementioned skills, which makes any sort of comparison to Bradley futile in nature. His forward-pressure style would have been tailor-made for Pac as I've ALREADY stated to other posters, which is why he probably took the counter-punching route. LET ME REPEAT THOUGH; HE CANNOT APPLY THIS GAMEPLAN EFFECTIVELY BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE THE SKILL OR THE TOOLS.

With our opinions aside, Bradley even describes this forward-pressure style of his with the statement, "WHEN I ACTUALLY TURNED PROFESSIONAL, THAT'S WHEN I HAD TO BECOME A HUNTER...GOING TO THE GUY AS OPPOSE TO BACKING UP...TAKE IT TO THESE GUYS...ROUGH THESE GUYS UP..."

I'm confused as to why your attacking(or insulting)me and saying for me to activate me comprehension skills..Bro we are in agreement that the style Bradley used in the Pac fight was not an aggressive pressure style..Which was my point..But your saying Bradley does not use this style effectively,and there we disagree..Bradley used that same style vs Cherry Peterson and Abregu(until the end of the fight like I've said already)..Where we differ is when you say Bradley can not use these skills effectively..His last fight with Pac he hurt his ankles,so most of the fight he was enable to use this tactic effectively..But I gave Bradley the first 3 rds because of this style,I also gave him the last 4 because of this same style that you say Bradley is so ineffective at applying...

That quote you put at the end of your post goes more to my point then your own...Bradley was a boxer not a pressure fighter,and that quote let's you know Bradley mind set..His approach..He has a boxers mentality first,but can bang and apply pressure...Bradley told the world on 24/7 that he is a boxer with a boxers mentality who learned how to be a pressure fighter from his trainer...Bradley is well rounded..You don't even take into account the manner in which he(Bradley)beat Cherry Peterson and Abregu is totally opposite to what your description of Bradley style was...Like I said we can disagree,but no need to call names or sling insults around..Cool??

[The Evil 1-2]

I'm confused as to why your attacking(or insulting)me and saying for me to activate me comprehension skills..Bro we are in agreement that the style Bradley used in the Pac fight was not an aggressive pressure style..Which was my point..But your saying Bradley does not use this style effectively,and there we disagree..Bradley used that same style vs Cherry Peterson and Abregu(until the end of the fight like I've said already)..Where we differ is when you say Bradley can not use these skills effectively..His last fight with Pac he hurt his ankles,so most of the fight he was enable to use this tactic effectively..But I gave Bradley the first 3 rds because of this style,I also gave him the last 4 because of this same style that you say Bradley is so ineffective at applying...

That quote you put at the end of your post goes more to my point then your own...Bradley was a boxer not a pressure fighter,and that quote let's you know Bradley mind set..His approach..He has a boxers mentality first,but can bang and apply pressure...Bradley told the world on 24/7 that he is a boxer with a boxers mentality who learned how to be a pressure fighter from his trainer...Bradley is well rounded..You don't even take into account the manner in which he(Bradley)beat Cherry Peterson and Abregu is totally opposite to what your description of Bradley style was...Like I said we can disagree,but no need to call names or sling insults around..Cool??

He used a counter-punching style on the outside effectively against Pac??!! Again, if this was the case, then it's safe to assume that YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THE FIGHT WAS NOT A ROBBERY AND THAT HE EARNED THE WIN.

To add, the incoherence in your assessment of his performance in that bout should be evident to you. First, you say that he hurt his ankles, so he was UNable to apply a counter-punching style effectively. Then, you say he was ABLE to apply it effectively for the first 3 rounds and then the last 4 rounds for a TOTAL OF 7 ROUNDS. Which one is it? He did or he didn't? If you say that he did, you're admitting that he won 7 rounds with that style, thus giving him the fight, which is BULL...

Lastly, you're also incoherent in labeling him a boxer NOT a pressure fighter. First, you say that he's not a pressure fighter. Then, you say that he "LEARNED HOW TO BE A PRESSURE FIGHTER..." Does it not logically follow that the culmination of his transformation in the pro rankings led to HIM BEING A PRESSURE FIGHTER??!! Again, which one is it for you? The quote that I gave you from Tim Bradley himself is pretty straightforward. He's the HUNTER who likes to go FORWARD and not BACK UP. He likes to ROUGH these guys up. What he just said is the epitome of a pressure fighter. Backing up has more to do with counter-punching and being on the outside; a STYLE THAT BRADLEY, SELF-ADMITTEDLY, DOES NOT PRIMARILY APPLY.

C'mon man, the man is saying it himself FROM HIS VERY OWN MOUTH...what more do you want?

[Rome-By-Ko]

He used a counter-punching style on the outside effectively against Pac??!! Again, if this was the case, then it's safe to assume that YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THE FIGHT WAS NOT A ROBBERY AND THAT HE EARNED THE WIN.

To add, the incoherence in your assessment of his performance in that bout should be evident to you. First, you say that he hurt his ankles, so he was UNable to apply a counter-punching style effectively. Then, you say he was ABLE to apply it effectively for the first 3 rounds and then the last 4 rounds for a TOTAL OF 7 ROUNDS. Which one is it? He did or he didn't? If you say that he did, you're admitting that he won 7 rounds with that style, thus giving him the fight, which is BULL...

Lastly, you're also incoherent in labeling him a boxer NOT a pressure fighter. First, you say that he's not a pressure fighter. Then, you say that he "LEARNED HOW TO BE A PRESSURE FIGHTER..." Does it not logically follow that the culmination of his transformation in the pro rankings led to HIM BEING A PRESSURE FIGHTER??!! Again, which one is it for you? The quote that I gave you from Tim Bradley himself is pretty straightforward. He's the HUNTER who likes to go FORWARD and not BACK UP. He likes to ROUGH these guys up. What he just said is the epitome of a pressure fighter. Backing up has more to do with counter-punching and being on the outside; a STYLE THAT BRADLEY, SELF-ADMITTEDLY, DOES NOT PRIMARILY APPLY.

C'mon man, the man is saying it himself FROM HIS VERY OWN MOUTH...what more do you want?

I'll start this by saying,I hope you can be an adult,if not I'll have to cut this discussion short..Like I've explain to you before no need for insults..I respect ya point and I'm not attacking you,if you can't do the same(as an adult)then I will just have to leave you to it...

Now onto ya post..I know you have reading comprehension skills(esp since you've ask about others)I said Bradley was not able to do the counter punching style for most of the fight..Most being the key word..Bradley won(imo)the first three rds,in the fourth he twisted his ankle and that alter his style for a few rds..Which is the reason Bradley was trading so much in the middle rds...I also gave you an example(that you chose to ignore and not respond to)of Bradley winning other fights with his counter punching style..So,I don't know what else you need to understand that Bradley is more of a jack of all trades,then the one track minded pressure fighter that you try to make him out to be...

Can you post the whole paragraph that quote was taking from..There is a reason why he was even saying he is a hunter and talking about his style in general..Anyone can post a sentence to fit their agenda..

"I can box, I can brawl, I'm well-conditioned -- no one is more conditioned than me," Bradley, 28, said.

See how easy that was,this is from an interview with Bradley..

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may...quiao-20120516

Here's the source...

At the end of the day I have two eyes so I don't need to read interviews to understand Bradley's style..He is a fighter who will do whatever takes his opponent out of their game..AKA a JACK OF ALL TRADES...

[The Evil 1-2]

I'll start this by saying,I hope you can be an adult,if not I'll have to cut this discussion short..Like I've explain to you before no need for insults..I respect ya point and I'm not attacking you,if you can't do the same(as an adult)then I will just have to leave you to it...

Now onto ya post..I know you have reading comprehension skills(esp since you've ask about others)I said Bradley was not able to do the counter punching style for most of the fight..Most being the key word..Bradley won(imo)the first three rds,in the fourth he twisted his ankle and that alter his style for a few rds..Which is the reason Bradley was trading so much in the middle rds...I also gave you an example(that you chose to ignore and not respond to)of Bradley winning other fights with his counter punching style..So,I don't know what else you need to understand that Bradley is more of a jack of all trades,then the one track minded pressure fighter that you try to make him out to be...

Can you post the whole paragraph that quote was taking from..There is a reason why he was even saying he is a hunter and talking about his style in general..Anyone can post a sentence to fit their agenda..

"I can box, I can brawl, I'm well-conditioned -- no one is more conditioned than me," Bradley, 28, said.

See how easy that was,this is from an interview with Bradley..

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may...quiao-20120516

Here's the source...

At the end of the day I have two eyes so I don't need to read interviews to understand Bradley's style..He is a fighter who will do whatever takes his opponent out of their game..AKA a JACK OF ALL TRADES...

Considering how most of the posters in this forum address each other, I believe I've been relatively respectful of your viewpoints.

You still haven't addressed the incoherence of your opinion of the Pac-Bradley bout. Your attempt to clarify it still doesn't take explain how you gave Bradley 7 rounds in that bout. Again, if he applied such a great counter-punching style, which gave him 7 rounds as you say, WHY IS THE FIGHT IN SUCH DISPUTE? Why do so many from boxing pundits to fighters believe it was a robbery? Such a public outcry, should be VERY TELLING FOR YOU.

In order to be a jack-of-all-trades fighter, you need to do a plethora of things relatively well. I just don't see how Bradley fits this label at all. He wins his fights primarily on a forward-pressure style. This style has gotten him to where he is now. Sure, he can SOMEWHAT box on the outside on OCCASION, but he doesn't do it very well. He almost always reverts back to this forward-pressure style.

Think about that quote you just posted. 2 out of the 3 traits he mentions fits EXACTLY what I've been saying about his style. The brawling aspect fits in with his pressure. The conditioning allows him to pressure so well for an extended period of time.

Sure, he has taken most of his opponents out of their game. However, it wasn't due to skillful nullification, but due to Bradley OVERWHELMING it with pressure. If you want to see skillful nullification, look at Ward and Mayweather as examples. I think these guys are more fitting of the jack-of-all-trades label you keep mentioning.

As for the source of the quote I posted, it's from the HBO "Portrait of a Fighter" series.

[Craveman]

Its an offense to me, if you compare between Bradley and Ward. If Ward and Bradley were the same size, Ward would kill this guy.

[Rome-By-Ko]

Considering how most of the posters in this forum address each other, I believe I've been relatively respectful of your viewpoints.

You still haven't addressed the incoherence of your opinion of the Pac-Bradley bout. Your attempt to clarify it still doesn't take explain how you gave Bradley 7 rounds in that bout. Again, if he applied such a great counter-punching style, which gave him 7 rounds as you say, WHY IS THE FIGHT IN SUCH DISPUTE? Why do so many from boxing pundits to fighters believe it was a robbery? Such a public outcry, should be VERY TELLING FOR YOU.

In order to be a jack-of-all-trades fighter, you need to do a plethora of things relatively well. I just don't see how Bradley fits this label at all. He wins his fights primarily on a forward-pressure style. This style has gotten him to where he is now. Sure, he can SOMEWHAT box on the outside on OCCASION, but he doesn't do it very well. He almost always reverts back to this forward-pressure style.

Think about that quote you just posted. 2 out of the 3 traits he mentions fits EXACTLY what I've been saying about his style. The brawling aspect fits in with his pressure. The conditioning allows him to pressure so well for an extended period of time.

Sure, he has taken most of his opponents out of their game. However, it wasn't due to skillful nullification, but due to Bradley OVERWHELMING it with pressure. If you want to see skillful nullification, look at Ward and Mayweather as examples. I think these guys are more fitting of the jack-of-all-trades label you keep mentioning.

As for the source of the quote I posted, it's from the HBO "Portrait of a Fighter" series.

I don't follow the view of public opinion..I view fights for myself and determine who I believe won based on that..IMO there were a lot of close rds in that fight(Pac vs Bradley),I believe rds 3 7 8 9 were all close rds that could have went either way..Rds 1 2 10 11 12 were clear Bradley rds imo..Now this is my view,I also gave Bradley 2 of the close rds 3 and 9 which gave Bradley the fight on my card..Now my opinion may not be the popular one,but it's my opinion nonetheless..It's also the way I came to seeing Bradley the winner of the fight...

I've already explained how I've seen(with my own two eyes)Bradley beat other opponents with a counter punching style so to say Bradley is just a pressure fighter is crazy..Dude not to mention you've said that the interview I posted helped ya argument that Bradley is a pressure fighter..You need conditioning to apply pressure as well as to counter punch and show movement for all 12 rds...That does not help or hurt ya argument,it should just show you the fact is Bradley is versatile...

I said in my very first post to you,that Ward and Mayweather are jack of all trades this is true..But Bradley is as well..The only difference in these fighters is that Bradley is not as polished as either fighter..But that does not change his ring I.Q. and his approach in the ring...It's a reason that even the late Manny Stewart said Bradley is good at everything great at nothing..I think this describes Bradley to a tee..Just because he does not make it look as pretty as Ward or Mayweather people downplay this about him..

[Money&TheProbem]

Not even close bro. Ward is the best in the world right behind Mayweather and right in front of Broner. P4P kings.

[ItsTrue]

Not even close bro. Ward is the best in the world right behind Mayweather and right in front of Broner. P4P kings.

Listen to this guy.