Boxing s a joke folks
What a dumb decision
WWF
What a dumb decision
WWF
Pacquiao lost
I think they have the same promoter. They will either push a garbage rematch where Arum will unleash Pac-Man or push Mayweather v Bradley. Mayweather is smart so he knows thats a backdeal. Pacman stayed "humble" lol and took the L like a champ. Bradley wants a rematch off top. I'm just glad I watched for free out here on base. I would have went to a bar anyway if I was in the States ha!.
The cycle of disrespect can start with just an appetizer.
That was a disagrace. I write articles for a major sports website and was put on probation just now to an article I wrote shortly after the fight because it was so harshly critical and I was so mad that I didn't proofread it, just went on a rant about how boxing keeps hurting itself time and time again. It was horrible and I feel terrible for Pacquiao. He outclassed Bradley tonight and it sucks for the sport of boxing. Just horrible all the way around. ESPN and HBO had it 11-1 FOR PACQUIAO FOR CHRIST"S SAKE!!!!! Fuck boxing, and that's coming from a journalist for the sport and lifelong fan.
I watched it with a big crowd of Filipinos.
They are heartbroken.
Aloha!
They are heartbroken.
Aloha!
I made the move to mixed martial arts several years ago. UFC isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but the fights aren't nearly as controversial, IMO.
This is a rather unusual decision. Not because people disagree with a split decision, that happens all the time, or because of the fighters involved. It is because it was a championship fight. Typically for judges to take away a belt with a decision, it has to be a pretty clear and dominating performance by the challenger.
Pacquiao was the one good thing that the sport had for the last 20 (30?) years. It's now back in the 90s at the Don King-circus level again.
Pacquiao's contract had a clause for an automatic rematch in case he lost the fight. The date is already set for sometime November 10. Of course it'll be a big money fight because people will want to see Manny right the injustice. Shady as Fuck!
On another thread I predicted a split-decision, but for Pac. I thought Bradley would contest throughout, and didn't envision Pac knocking him out. When I heard the score on the first card, I thought UH OH. I didn't see it as a two-point fight, but then again, I felt it would be a split decision because Bradley would contest in enough rounds that one judge would give him the nod. Even in unanimous decisions, it isn't unusual to have one judge either have a bigger spread, or a closer score than the other two judges. There always seems to be one judge that sees a completely different fight than the other two. Harold Lederman actually comes out of this looking like a genius, because before the fight when he was discussing the judges assigned, he felt two of them were shaky choices and weren't ready for such a big assignment.
As for the fight, Pac didn't DESTROY Bradley, but I felt the cleaner shots were landed by Pac, though there weren't a ton of them. I felt Pac dictated throughout, keeping Bradley on the defensive. Even when Bradley initiated with his jab, Pac got the better of the action. The ONLY thing I could see that may have cost Pac the fight was that he laid back early in the rounds, and came on in the last minute. Maybe he lost rounds because of that. I still largely go by the maxim that a challenger has to clearly beat a champion. I didn't see that here.
I'm going to place some blame on Pac, because though he fought well, he didn't seem to come into the fight prepared. He doesn't appear to be focused the way he has in the past. I know he'd had few personal/marital/lifestyle issues, which led to his religious conversion. There were some issues in his camp between Roach and his physical trainer, Ariza. He thought it was important to watch the Heat/Celtics game before getting himself ready to fight, then was rushed and not even able to warm up properly (most of his pre-fight prep was getting his calves stretched and warm). Many thought this would be a bit of a test for Pac, and I would have expected him to be more on-point. It just adds fuel to the belief that he's close to walking away from boxing and retiring to politics and family life in the Philippines.
As for the fight, Pac didn't DESTROY Bradley, but I felt the cleaner shots were landed by Pac, though there weren't a ton of them. I felt Pac dictated throughout, keeping Bradley on the defensive. Even when Bradley initiated with his jab, Pac got the better of the action. The ONLY thing I could see that may have cost Pac the fight was that he laid back early in the rounds, and came on in the last minute. Maybe he lost rounds because of that. I still largely go by the maxim that a challenger has to clearly beat a champion. I didn't see that here.
I'm going to place some blame on Pac, because though he fought well, he didn't seem to come into the fight prepared. He doesn't appear to be focused the way he has in the past. I know he'd had few personal/marital/lifestyle issues, which led to his religious conversion. There were some issues in his camp between Roach and his physical trainer, Ariza. He thought it was important to watch the Heat/Celtics game before getting himself ready to fight, then was rushed and not even able to warm up properly (most of his pre-fight prep was getting his calves stretched and warm). Many thought this would be a bit of a test for Pac, and I would have expected him to be more on-point. It just adds fuel to the belief that he's close to walking away from boxing and retiring to politics and family life in the Philippines.
"The best kind of pride is that which compels a man to do his best when no one is watching."
I am not a conspiracy theorist and generally shy away from all of the tinfoil hat stuff.
Also, I do not claim to be a boxing expert. However, I have scanned ten or so different articles about this fight, and the overwhelming consensus among the "experts" is that Pacquiao not only won, but won very clearly, dominating in percentage of punches landed and in harder punches.
So, it's either:
a) One or more of the judges was incompetent, a shocking thing given the major importance of a championship fight.
b) One or more of the judges was paid and/or coerced into incorrectly deciding the fight against Pacquiao, which would be a plausible thing given the huge amounts of money in boxing, and the sordid history of boxing.
Now, if it is indeed "B," let's ask the question - who benefits?
1. Pacquiao - he becomes more real to his fanbase and most importantly his voter base back home in the Phillipines, giving him a nice story arc of redemption when he battles his way back to victory in a few months against Bradley. He also gets to pocket tens of millions of dollars before retiring. He then retires in a moment of maximum glory and money as part of a plan to rise in politics and become the Phillipine president.
2. Bradley - money money money
3. Organized crime/inside betting - money money money
4. boxing promoters, HBO, etc - money money money
Also, I do not claim to be a boxing expert. However, I have scanned ten or so different articles about this fight, and the overwhelming consensus among the "experts" is that Pacquiao not only won, but won very clearly, dominating in percentage of punches landed and in harder punches.
So, it's either:
a) One or more of the judges was incompetent, a shocking thing given the major importance of a championship fight.
b) One or more of the judges was paid and/or coerced into incorrectly deciding the fight against Pacquiao, which would be a plausible thing given the huge amounts of money in boxing, and the sordid history of boxing.
Now, if it is indeed "B," let's ask the question - who benefits?
1. Pacquiao - he becomes more real to his fanbase and most importantly his voter base back home in the Phillipines, giving him a nice story arc of redemption when he battles his way back to victory in a few months against Bradley. He also gets to pocket tens of millions of dollars before retiring. He then retires in a moment of maximum glory and money as part of a plan to rise in politics and become the Phillipine president.
2. Bradley - money money money
3. Organized crime/inside betting - money money money
4. boxing promoters, HBO, etc - money money money
pac lost at least 1-3 fights against juan manuel marquez, and the judges held for him each time.
now this.
wtf?
now this.
wtf?
Last night's decision ruined any plans to watch Boxing in the near future for me.
Pac got jobbed in this fight, but he gets no sympathy from me because he got the benefit of the doubt against Marquez. I was also comparing this fight to Mayweather/Cotto as I was watching it. It seems as though Pacquiao was penalized for trying to knock out Bradley. Mayweather willingly spent a noticeable amount of his fight against the ropes and putting on his "show", and I believe that it was a poorer performance than the one we saw by Pacquiao yesterday.I'll keep watching despite the politics, some of the undercards are very entertaining. KO from Jones/Bailey: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...Hqo#t=425s
I watched the fight and Pacquiao won the fight and was robbed by the decision.
That's not even the Worst Decision in Boxing History that distinction belongs to Pernell Whitaker vs. Cesar Chavez. Pernell was ROBBED and some even say he was robbed in the De La Hoya fight also.
That's not even the Worst Decision in Boxing History that distinction belongs to Pernell Whitaker vs. Cesar Chavez. Pernell was ROBBED and some even say he was robbed in the De La Hoya fight also.
Quote: (06-11-2012 06:22 PM)TheNatural Wrote:
I watched the fight and Pacquiao won the fight and was robbed by the decision.
That's not even the Worst Decision in Boxing History that distinction belongs to Pernell Whitaker vs. Cesar Chavez. Pernell was ROBBED and some even say he was robbed in the De La Hoya fight also.
You're 100% right. Every time there's a bad decision there are renewed cries, but this is not unique throughout the history of the sport. The sport was founded on it. It's always been a grimy business. There is no downfall of boxing. It will always be here. There will always be new, talented fighters that come along to replace the ones the get old. And the game will continue to be played the way it always has.
"The best kind of pride is that which compels a man to do his best when no one is watching."
Quote: (06-11-2012 07:43 PM)Timoteo Wrote:
Quote: (06-11-2012 06:22 PM)TheNatural Wrote:
I watched the fight and Pacquiao won the fight and was robbed by the decision.
That's not even the Worst Decision in Boxing History that distinction belongs to Pernell Whitaker vs. Cesar Chavez. Pernell was ROBBED and some even say he was robbed in the De La Hoya fight also.
You're 100% right. Every time there's a bad decision there are renewed cries, but this is not unique throughout the history of the sport. The sport was founded on it. It's always been a grimy business. There is no downfall of boxing. It will always be here. There will always be new, talented fighters that come along to replace the ones the get old. And the game will continue to be played the way it always has.
I haven't watched this fight yet so I can't comment on it (was out swooping a fly girl).
However, all this talk that "boxing is now done" is laughable.
Watch this documentary: The Last Round: Muhammad Ali VS George Chuvalo Documentary http://www.thegmanifesto.com/2012/04/the...ntary.html
They were talking about boxing being in "trouble" during The Ali Era for God's sakes.
They have been talking about boxing being "done" for 100 years.
I can guarantee that if this decision was bad, I have seen 500 worse.
This is just how boxing is.
Always has been, always will be.
Quote: (06-11-2012 07:55 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:
Quote: (06-11-2012 07:43 PM)Timoteo Wrote:
Quote: (06-11-2012 06:22 PM)TheNatural Wrote:
I watched the fight and Pacquiao won the fight and was robbed by the decision.
That's not even the Worst Decision in Boxing History that distinction belongs to Pernell Whitaker vs. Cesar Chavez. Pernell was ROBBED and some even say he was robbed in the De La Hoya fight also.
You're 100% right. Every time there's a bad decision there are renewed cries, but this is not unique throughout the history of the sport. The sport was founded on it. It's always been a grimy business. There is no downfall of boxing. It will always be here. There will always be new, talented fighters that come along to replace the ones the get old. And the game will continue to be played the way it always has.
I haven't watched this fight yet so I can't comment on it (was out swooping a fly girl).
However, all this talk that "boxing is now done" is laughable.
Watch this documentary: The Last Round: Muhammad Ali VS George Chuvalo Documentary http://www.thegmanifesto.com/2012/04/the...ntary.html
They were talking about boxing being in "trouble" during The Ali Era for God's sakes.
They have been talking about boxing being "done" for 100 years.
I can guarantee that if this decision was bad, I have seen 500 worse.
This is just how boxing is.
Always has been, always will be.
Duane Ford, one of the judges, defended his scorecard, stating he felt Bradley gave Pacquiao "a boxing lesson." Agree or not, I appreciate that he spoke up. Too many officials in sports are protected, or forbidden to speak, so there's no accountability. I think the sport goes through periods where the talent is thin, but just like that, there's suddenly depth again in some of the traditionally deep divisions. The sport IS hurt by the multiple sanctioning bodies, thus keeping the best fighters from meeting each other. That's the lone negative from previous eras. The sport was still dirty, but at least we got the good matchups. Also, PPV has also been a culprit in this. I definitely miss being able to see great championship fights on ABC Wide World of Sports, or CBS. First it was closed circuit (I watched Leonard/Hagler at a movie theater in Astoria, Queens, NY), but when cable and PPV starting taking all the best matchups, it made boxing less accessible. There's no going back though.
I'm definitely interested in your take on the fight...
"The best kind of pride is that which compels a man to do his best when no one is watching."
And we had another loss in the boxing world. The great Cuban heavyweight, Teofilo Stevenson, passed away. Not seeing him fight as a professional was one of my greatest regrets. He would have turned pro during an era of great heavyweight fighters.
"The best kind of pride is that which compels a man to do his best when no one is watching."
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)