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

[IronDanHamza]

It would've been cool to see the Bute fight but it was in the works before he got beat. It's like - What do you do then? Fight him coming off a loss? What's the point of that? So I don't really hold that against him. Bute should have been in the Super Six then it would have happened. Skill wise Ward is better than Bradley easily.

TS wants me to give Bradley credit for Pacquiao. Yeah I give him credit for taking the fight but he really lost all 3 fights so you really can't use that as a reason to inflate his status. Cotto's had twice as many big fights as him but we're supposed to rank Bradley higher because he did better against Pacquiao than Cotto did? That's just silly. If we're talking accomplishments you have to put Cotto higher.

Ward should have fought him after the Super Six but he was talking about Bute needs to prove himself. Insee where he's coming from but still, that was the fight people wanted.

After the Froch fight it was dead.

Ward is way better and greater than Bradley that's obvious.

[daggum]

Ward fought the best guys in his division, Bute? If he beat Froch he would've got the fight. He lost so that killed his momentum and he didn't get it. Dirrell? I'm not upset I didn't see that fight. Can't make a guy fight you that doesn't want to, they are friends so it's understandable they wouldn't want to fight. Ward just fought more top guys and won most of his fights clearly as apposed to them being controversial this is why I give him the edge. The first Kovalev fight was controversial then he beat him in the rematch. Whether you like it or not he was widely regarded #1 at 168 and 175 and was also p4p#2 for a long time and then p4p#1. Look I get it you're a Bradley fan and he does deserve respect but to say he's had a better career than all those guys is too much. When it's all said and done it's highly likely most/all of those guys will be rated higher than him.

wards fights weren't controversial??? what are you watching?

[daggum]

It would've been cool to see the Bute fight but it was in the works before he got beat. It's like - What do you do then? Fight him coming off a loss? What's the point of that? So I don't really hold that against him. Bute should have been in the Super Six then it would have happened. Skill wise Ward is better than Bradley easily.

TS wants me to give Bradley credit for Pacquiao. Yeah I give him credit for taking the fight but he really lost all 3 fights so you really can't use that as a reason to inflate his status. Cotto's had twice as many big fights as him but we're supposed to rank Bradley higher because he did better against Pacquiao than Cotto did? That's just silly. If we're talking accomplishments you have to put Cotto higher.

how was it in the works? he was offered a career high payday against the number 1 guy in teh division and said no. excuses for ducking

[daggum]

Ward should have fought him after the Super Six but he was talking about Bute needs to prove himself. Insee where he's coming from but still, that was the fight people wanted.

After the Froch fight it was dead.

Ward is way better and greater than Bradley that's obvious.

boxer turns down career high pay against #1 guy...i can see where he's coming from.....boxing fans are the worst

[IronDanHamza]

boxer turns down career high pay against #1 guy...i can see where he's coming from.....boxing fans are the worst

Well if you could read you would clearly see I said "he should have fought him" you ****ing ******.

I said I can see his logic that "he needs to prove himself" because it's true at the time his resume was very weak however like I clearly just said it was the fight the people wanted to see and he should have fought him.

[daggum]

Well if you could read you would clearly see I said "he should have fought him" you ****ing ******.

I said I can see his logic that "he needs to prove himself" because it's true at the time his resume was very weak however like I clearly just said it was the fight the people wanted to see and he should have fought him.

i can't read man!!!

we all remember how ward said dmitri sartison had to prove himself right...oh wait he trid to figth him but couldnt find his pen when offered a career high payay against bute. thats odd.

[HarvardBlue]

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.

How does a controversial win over Pacquiao trump 2 losses to him? Calzaghe had wins over Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins. Two of the best fighters in the last 2 decades. Combined they're better wins than Pacquiao/Marquez. You're just throwing Alexander and Peterson in there to make your point but no one is looking at these 2 as gate keepers to greatness. Those 2 names would be worth zilch if they were on Mayweather's resume.

Ward had Kessler, Abraham, Dawson, Froch, and 2xs over Kovalev. Combined that's better than Pacquiao and Marquez. Miranda, Green, and Bika is comparable to Alexander and Peterson.

Again this is just a post to get people spinning their wheels so you could throw out whatever rebuttal you want and call it a win.

[IronDanHamza]

i can't read man!!!

we all remember how ward said dmitri sartison had to prove himself right...oh wait he trid to figth him but couldnt find his pen when offered a career high payay against bute. thats odd.

Ok, seriously, which part of "he should have fought Bute" are you not understanding?

[Prince Madison]

the guy who went life and death with fringe level provodnikov?

[Mr.Fantastic]

Literally not exaggerating. Literally 1 member of the media had Bradley winning.

Can't put a number on the fans on this board but itnwas definitely extremely small %.

None of those fights are even close to that. Especially the likes of Floyd Castillo and Cotto Mosley which were 50-50 in the media.

Even slightly more comparable ones like Ward-Kovalev, even those over 20% of the media didn't have Kovlaev winning.

Literally all but one person had Pacquaio winning.

It's not comparable at all you are comparing mostly close fights to one of the clearest robberies ever.

Like I said if you want to play dumb that's fine but don't expect others to.

I saw some dudes on Youtube giving breakdowns on why Bradley won. No bullshit. Forgot which one was it but he goes to the events and interviews boxers. Not DBN nor Radio Raheem, it was someone else. When I feel like it, I'll look for it since you cool.

The Pac vs Bradley may be more clear than them but it doesn't change the fact that Floyd vs Castillo is controversial, even to this day. It's a fight that has been rescored and many people still think Floyd lost.

Twenty percent didn't have Kovalev winning? You sure about that? I remember seeing different.

They do compare because they're controversial to where a lot of people think the other guy lost. Your opinion nor mine is the only word that exists. Go to boxrec, the win still stands with Bradley just like it stands with the others. I keep having to repeat myself when it's not hard to see it. I know I'm not explaining it wrong either. People just trying to twist the logic.

It's totally the same standard, of course everyone has had close fights you're stating the obvious but there's a difference between a close fight that could go either way and a total robbery. Pacquiao-Bradley had more outcry than almost any fight I can remember, there's really close fights and then there's robberies. That's why he doesn't get the credit for it. You can argue Kovalev beat Ward or Castillo beat Mayweather or Cotto lost to Mosley and millions of other ones but everyone agrees they were super-close fights so even if you had one guy winning you still have to give him credit because you can see it either way. I didn't see one person claim Bradley won the fight. Even the guys who don't like Pacquiao had him winning clearly. He made it a tough fight but it's still a clear loss to me.

Ward fought the best guys in his division, Bute? If he beat Froch he would've got the fight. He lost so that killed his momentum and he didn't get it. Dirrell? I'm not upset I didn't see that fight. Can't make a guy fight you that doesn't want to, they are friends so it's understandable they wouldn't want to fight. Ward just fought more top guys and won most of his fights clearly as apposed to them being controversial this is why I give him the edge. The first Kovalev fight was controversial then he beat him in the rematch. Whether you like it or not he was widely regarded #1 at 168 and 175 and was also p4p#2 for a long time and then p4p#1. Look I get it you're a Bradley fan and he does deserve respect but to say he's had a better career than all those guys is too much. When it's all said and done it's highly likely most/all of those guys will be rated higher than him.

From a talent standpoint i'd have to rank most of those guys above him as well. I always thought he got by more on his grit and determination. Certainly if we're talking Ward and Cotto I think both of those guys were more skilled than him especially Ward. If you want to rank him above those guys that's fine but as you can see not many others will agree. Nobody's hating on him that's just their opinion. Just like it's your opinion his career was better. But just because you have a "win" on your resume doesn't mean we need to give you full credit. It would be liking giving Jose Luis Ramirez credit for beating Pernell Whitaker in a fight where he lost nearly every round but got the W.

I give him credit but I thought Pacquiao beat him all 3 times, also had Marquez beating him close and I gave him the Provodnikov fight but I couldn't help but think a great fighter wouldn't have struggled as badly as that. To me he comes under the "very good" category not quite "great". Now if he'd stuck around a couple more years and cleaned out the WW division i'd give him that but he didn't fight any of those guys. It would've been cool to see him fight any 1 of Porter, Thurman, Garcia, Spence. He decided not to which is his decision but how I am gonna give him more credit than Cotto when he's fought half as many top guys for 8 years vs 13 years? Cotto's had like 20 title fights whether you like him or not you gotta respect that. It's impressive to see a guy do that across 4 weight divisions.

No it's not the same standard. Many people thought Pac won vs Bradley just like people thought Ward, Canelo, and even Cotto lost. Just cause Pac vs Bradley had more doesn't take away the controversy from the others. It's not hard to understand lol.

What do all of those fights have in common? They're all controversial meaning there is no definite conclusion besides the W or the L on the record. Sucks but true. I've been having to repeat myself over and over and people understand but don't want to display it because my point is better than everyone's so far.

Ward didn't fight all the best guys, again you dudes keep exaggerating. Froch was the one that did most of the work in the division, Ward just beat Froch and others but it was Froch that put in way more work AND took the risks.

Talent standpoint? Ward isn't as talented as many people make it believe. They just see the 0 and they automatically assume he's a master boxer, especially when all they see is one or two fights and the rest is nothing but highlights. I've seen it many many times with my own eyes. You can also tell who does that on here in NSB. If Bradley wasn't as talented, he wouldn't have outboxed Marquez the way he did. He won more rounds vs Pac in his prime than Mosley, Cotto, Margarito, and others. What do they have in common? They're all bigger men than Bradley and they got smoked so much worse. Who the fuck did Ward fight that was in the level of Pac or Marquez? You know the answer to that. So don't give me that bullshit talent route.

Again just stupid logic.

Cotto-Mosley? Really? You are really comparing that to Pacquaio-Bradley.

There are some real legitmate robberies out there where only a fool wouldn't consider.

Williams-Lara
Whitaker-Ramirez
Santa Cruz-Casamayor
Pacquaio-Bradley

Where literally none of the media had the "winner" winning.

Not the case for the other fights you are comparing it to.

It's not stupid logic, it's a legit logical reason.

Yes Cotto vs Mosley had its controversy. Not by me but there were people who thought Mosley got robbed. I'm not saying it's at the level of Pac vs Bradley but what you're still not understanding is that there was controversy. And yes, people in the media did have Mosley winning.

Another real legitimate robbery is Floyd vs Castillo, Oscar vs Sturm, Oscar vs Tito, & Oscar vs Mosley 2. Yet as many times I can say that they should be overturned, they're not. The records in history will still show them no matter, just like Pac vs Bradley, Ward vs Kovalev 1(repeating not at the same level but it was still considered a robbery by many), and others.

You know you see it, you're just acting dumb. You're one of the smartest ones on here. It's so easy to see where I'm coming from, the only ones that truly don't want to see it are the ones in denial.

I don't have much time today but you've been cool to me so I'll give you a reply. I do agree with you that Bradley is underrated, doesn't get near enough respect. But I think you went over the top with the thread concept and you probably know that.

Pac; Dishonest to even include this. Beyond the obvious fact that he didn't win it, May fans trolling Pac fans over it doesn't validate anything.

Marquez; Wasn't this shortly before his retirement? I think he was 40. Take Pac off his resume (who he only beat clearly once in 4 fights) and what has Marquez done?

Witter? Such a reach to even include him.

Alexander; I like Devon, I believed in him. But, he went nowhere. Got schooled by Khan and had his ass beat by Aaron freakin Martinez. For all the promise he had at the time of the Bradley fight, he turned out not to be that great overall. Unfortunately.

Peterson; This was like 8 years ago and Peterson had beaten no one at the time. In fact, he never went on to do much afterward. I think he had a draw with Victor Ortiz shortly after this fight.

I don't have enough time right now to list the resumes of the 4 other fighters (I am working and just took a 10min break to do this) but I wanted to at least give you my thoughts about Timmy's resume. If I get time to explain why the others are comparable or better, I will.

It is not over the top. Bradley is truly underrated and people don't want to see that he was really better than most boxers of this generation.

If you're going to take away Pac from Bradley, make sure you take Kovalev from Ward, Castillo from Floyd, Hopkins from Calzaghe, and others.

Marquez just came off his biggest win of his career and then he fought Bradley, no excuses. Take away Froch from Ward, what's so special about Ward's resume? Take away Hopkins from Calzaghe, what does he have? Take away Mosley from Cotto, what does he have? Take away Lara from Canelo, what does he have? You guys keep trying to only have it your way.

A reach? Witter was top 1/2 guys at Jr. WW and Bradley went to his country and beat him. You just don't remember or maybe you do but don't want to.

Peterson beat Khan and Holt before losing to Matthysse. Guess what? Matthysse lost to Devon who got outclassed by Bradley.

How does a controversial win over Pacquiao trump 2 losses to him? Calzaghe had wins over Roy Jones and Bernard Hopkins. Two of the best fighters in the last 2 decades. Combined they're better wins than Pacquiao/Marquez. You're just throwing Alexander and Peterson in there to make your point but no one is looking at these 2 as gate keepers to greatness. Those 2 names would be worth zilch if they were on Mayweather's resume.

Ward had Kessler, Abraham, Dawson, Froch, and 2xs over Kovalev. Combined that's better than Pacquiao and Marquez. Miranda, Green, and Bika is comparable to Alexander and Peterson.

Again this is just a post to get people spinning their wheels so you could throw out whatever rebuttal you want and call it a win.

You guys keep doing the same thing over and over. Just want to point out the controversy with Pac vs Bradley but don't want to point out the controversy of others. Just admit that you guys don't really have anything.

Bradley fought Pacquiao at his best, not Mayweather.

They're not comparable. Bika, Green, and Miranda? Really? Wow! Don't forget the others that I posted on my opening post. You broke it down by bits to make it more favorable instead of comparing the whole thing. Wins over Pac, Marquez, Rios, Vargas, Peterson, Alexander, Casamayor, Holt, Witter, Vazquez, and others absolutely stomps anything Ward has done in total.

Calzaghe's win over Kessler was better than Ward's win over him by a mile. I never saw Bradley trying to drain anyone like Ward did with Dawson either. Carl Froch beat Abraham before Ward in the Super Six btw. At the end of the day, those are wins on Ward's record right?