Anyone saw the Pacquiao/Bradley boxing fight?

[Guest]

Yes, it was last Saturday, so old news. But, I haven't seen it mentioned here. I just had another friend tell me he's done with boxing and is following the UFC instead. My husband said the same thing. He's only watching boxing because of Pacquiao.

Anyway, if you didn't know, Pacquiao out-punched Bradley by 94 power punches so much so that Bradley had to go on his post-fight interview in a wheelchair but the judges ruled Bradley the winner by split-decision. Everyone was shocked including Bradley.

So, really, the most interesting moment of the fight was that, not only did a Filipino sing the Philippine Anthem, a Filipino-American (born in the US to 2 Filipino parents - the runner-up to the American Idol this year) sang the American Anthem.

The rest, I can only conclude, is rigged - gearing towards more money at the rematch.

So yeah, boxing has ceased to be a SPORT, it's reduced to a casino event.

[bytor2112]

Definitely a robbery. Marquez was robbed when he fought Pac last time and the time before.....Pac is a good sport and will put an old fashion wood shed beating on Bradley in November.

[volgadon]

Boxing has had a long history of rigged events. Nothing new at all.

[Vort]

And people think MMA is like WWE.

[JesusParadox]

One of the judges said something that really resonated with me. He said if it was a street fight then Paq would have won. However, it is not a street fight and they are judged round by round. There are so many variables to account for when judging each round.

[Vort]

One of the judges said something that really resonated with me. He said if it was a street fight then Paq would have won. However, it is not a street fight and they are judged round by round. There are so many variables to account for when judging each round.

This is false. Who landed the most punches and who did the most damage are the criteria for awarding rounds. There are no variables for style points or for who has the prettier trunks. According to pretty much everyone who saw the match (except for two of the judges), Pacquaio landed by far the more effective punches. It is clear that he landed twice as many of them as his opponent. Partially this is a defect of the ten-point must system, which is stupidly used in MMA as well. But mostly, it's a defect of incompetent judges.

I can only assume that the scorecards are printed in Braille.

[Guest]

Definitely a robbery. Marquez was robbed when he fought Pac last time and the time before.....Pac is a good sport and will put an old fashion wood shed beating on Bradley in November.

Ah Bytor! I guess our moons are not aligned properly today! I disagree with this too! Well, at least for the Nov (or was it December?) 2011 fight.

[JesusParadox]

This is false. Who landed the most punches and who did the most damage are the criteria for awarding rounds. There are no variables for style points or for who has the prettier trunks. According to pretty much everyone who saw the match (except for two of the judges), Pacquaio landed by far the more effective punches. It is clear that he landed twice as many of them as his opponent. Partially this is a defect of the ten-point must system, which is stupidly used in MMA as well. But mostly, it's a defect of incompetent judges.

I can only assume that the scorecards are printed in Braille.

Then the judge told an outright lie... maybe I miss read it

When I get back on in about an hour I will look up article for the exact quote.

[Vort]

Then the judge told an outright lie... maybe I miss read it

When I get back on in about an hour I will look up article for the exact quote.

I have no idea whether the judge lied, but if he spoke as you quoted him, he was wrong.*

*NB: I didn't see the fight. I know only what I have read. But I have seen enough fights and enough worthless judging (and enough questionable fights where the fix seemed to be in) that I'm confident that this was, at best, another case of blind judges.

[bytor2112]

Ah Bytor! I guess our moons are not aligned properly today! I disagree with this too! Well, at least for the Nov (or was it December?) 2011 fight.

Which part? If it wasn't for the 3 knockdowns in the first round Marquez would have easily won the first fight...instead of a draw and the second fight was close, but most believe Marquez should have got the win and the last meeting???? Marquez totally dominated Pac. in that meeting. ( and I am a huge Pac fan)

Pac was robbed in the Bradley fight and in the rematch, it will be an ole fashioned whoop down by the Pac.

[Guest]

One of the judges said something that really resonated with me. He said if it was a street fight then Paq would have won. However, it is not a street fight and they are judged round by round. There are so many variables to account for when judging each round.

This is false. Who landed the most punches and who did the most damage are the criteria for awarding rounds. There are no variables for style points or for who has the prettier trunks. According to pretty much everyone who saw the match (except for two of the judges), Pacquaio landed by far the more effective punches. It is clear that he landed twice as many of them as his opponent. Partially this is a defect of the ten-point must system, which is stupidly used in MMA as well. But mostly, it's a defect of incompetent judges.

I can only assume that the scorecards are printed in Braille.

Vort and MasterOrator are both correct.

Clean punches is just one criteria - a very important criteria - and effective defense is also a criteria... basically, if the punch goes through the defense, then it should count. But if there are more punches that are blocked than there are punches that went through, the guy on defense can get a higher score.

In the case of the Pacquiao/Bradley fight... in these two criteria, Pacquaio won hands-down. There's really no question about it. Pacquiao threw lesser punches than Bradley but connected more punches than Bradley. This should tell you that Pacquiao hands-down won offense and defense.

Another criteria is ring presence - if you're constantly thrown against the ropes, it counts against you. If you look like you have a good command of the floor, it's to your advantage.

In the P/B fight, Pacquaio definitely dominated the ring.

Another criteria is effective aggressiveness. If you're constantly backing away from the other guy, it can count against you. If you're slinging punches and counter punches, it counts for you.

In the P/B fight, there were rounds that were solidly Pacquaio, there are rounds that were Bradley - especially towards the end.

But, overall, round per round, it was Pacquiao's game.

[Guest]

Which part? If it wasn't for the 3 knockdowns in the first round Marquez would have easily won the first fight...instead of a draw and the second fight was close, but most believe Marquez should have got the win and the last meeting???? Marquez totally dominated Pac. in that meeting. ( and I am a huge Pac fan)

Pac was robbed in the Bradley fight and in the rematch, it will be an ole fashioned whoop down by the Pac.

I agree with you on Pac/Marquez I and II. I don't agree with you on III. Pacman was not his usual self - a little stiff on the "dancing" if you know what I'm talking about, and not his usual intensity. So, okay, his ring presence might be sub-par. But, his intensity was level with Marquez' so I got them balanced on that. But, objectively watching round per round, Pacman's offense and defense were definitely hands-down better than Marquez in most of the rounds - especially towards the end. Marquez was beat up!

I agreed with the PPV announcers when they said they don't understand why Marquez' coach was telling him he is winning. He was not winning... or at least, if he was, it was still anybody's game. I think that had a lot to do with Marquez' loss of intensity in the last few rounds.

Okay, granted, I'm a Pacman fan. Filipino here after all. :)

Edited June 14, 2012 by anatess

[bytor2112]

Okay, granted, I'm a Pacman fan.

Me too!!

[Vort]

Not to stir up a hornet's nest, but honestly, when you have a top-quality product like the UFC offering truly intriguing and highly entertaining matchups -- and in MMA, which by its nature is just plain a lot more interesting to watch than boxing -- why would anyone put up with the open corruption in the various boxing associations, not to mention the judging? MMA judging is sometimes spectacularly bad, but that really is the exception to the rule. In MMA, it's more likely to be the referee who screws up than the judges.

On the whole, top to bottom, UFC is simply a better product than any boxing on the planet. If I had a choice of PPV to buy, there is not a question at all of which I would buy. It's not even close. Rare tenderloin vs. Big Mac.

Boxing will not die, but within a generation I expect it to be more or less completely supplanted by UFC and possibly other good MMA venues.

[Guest]

Not to stir up a hornet's nest, but honestly, when you have a top-quality product like the UFC offering truly intriguing and highly entertaining matchups -- and in MMA, which by its nature is just plain a lot more interesting to watch than boxing -- why would anyone put up with the open corruption in the various boxing associations, not to mention the judging? MMA judging is sometimes spectacularly bad, but that really is the exception to the rule. In MMA, it's more likely to be the referee who screws up than the judges.

On the whole, top to bottom, UFC is simply a better product than any boxing on the planet. If I had a choice of PPV to buy, there is not a question at all of which I would buy. It's not even close. Rare tenderloin vs. Big Mac.

Boxing will not die, but within a generation I expect it to be more or less completely supplanted by UFC and possibly other good MMA venues.

You are very much correct and I think your boxing prediction is going to come to pass... Boxing will go down the route of WWE. Still there, but just for super die-hard fans.

Personally, though. I still can't stomach UFC. Even after all the new "safety" rules. It's just got a certain brutality to it that is too raw for me. I watch UFC but I have to be doing something else so the match is just in the periphery.

The last one I saw was that big fat guy that I couldn't believe is strong enough to outmatch the muscle guy.

My favorite guy so far is the tall black dude with chicken legs...

Okay, there's a reason why I don't know the fighter's names. If I pay attention to the fighter's names they become more up close and personal and then I really wouldn't be able to watch it anymore...

[Bini]

Anatess, what will you do when your boys become the next Ultimate Fighter champs?

[Guest]

Anatess, what will you do when your boys become the next Ultimate Fighter champs?

Oh no! Not gonna happen if I have something to say about it!

Of course with these boys... I often find that nobody listens to what I have to say about it. Waaaaa.

I want a daughter! These boys in my family can easily gang up on me!

[Bini]

Oh no! Not gonna happen if I have something to say about it!

Of course with these boys... I often find that nobody listens to what I have to say about it. Waaaaa.

I want a daughter! These boys in my family can easily gang up on me!

Haha! And I agree - you need a little girl! Now that I got a girl, I so badly want a little boy.. Lol

[Guest]

haha! And i agree - you need a little girl! Now that i got a girl, i so badly want a little boy.. Lol

Trade!