[Boxing] Pacquiao vs Bradley June 9th

[PinoyRocket]

Originally Posted by bladeage I doubt Marquez will win it. Manny is **** outta luck anywhere he fights apparently, so he's gonna have to go for a KO. I think he can go KO Marquez if he doesn't allow him to maintain that range where he can move and counterpunch. He's gonna have to smother him and turn it into a brawl like Diaz did with Marquez.

Pastor Manny will brawl with Marquez? I doubt it.

[bladeage]

Originally Posted by PinoyRocket Pastor Manny will brawl with Marquez? I doubt it.

He's gonna have to. Trying to box Marquez hasn't really worked out for him in 3 fights. But then again, trying to box Marquez hasn't worked out for anyone except Floyd.

[Prince]

Originally Posted by bladeage He's gonna have to. Trying to box Marquez hasn't really worked out for him in 3 fights. But then again, trying to box Marquez hasn't worked out for anyone except the bigger and taller Floyd.

fixed it for you. that's the same reason why Pacman can't beat him.

[SamFisher]

Originally Posted by bladeage I doubt Marquez will win it. Manny is **** outta luck anywhere he fights apparently, so he's gonna have to go for a KO.

Other than the one he got against Marquez last time out...this is correct.

[Geaux Rockets]

Interesting video showing the ridiculous bias the HBO commentators showed towards Pacquiao. Lampley should be ashamed of himself.

[PinoyRocket]

Originally Posted by Geaux Rockets Interesting video showing the ridiculous bias the HBO commentators showed towards Pacquiao. Lampley should be ashamed of himself.

right, the majority of the world is biased.

[Dei]

Originally Posted by Geaux Rockets Interesting video showing the ridiculous bias the HBO commentators showed towards Pacquiao. Lampley should be ashamed of himself.

Where do I watch the 10000 other videos exposing the other conspiracy articles about how Pacquiao won?

[KingCheetah]

Originally Posted by Geaux Rockets Interesting video showing the ridiculous bias the HBO commentators showed towards Pacquiao. Lampley should be ashamed of himself.

Thanks for posting this definitely some bias towards Paq, but I would bet you could make a video that showed Manny drilling Bradley repeatedly as was done when Marquez was the loser of a fight that he won against Paq.

[ipaman]

something is happening in boxing and i don't think it is a conspiracy.

if you watched the chavez jr vs lee fight you would see chavez won at least 4 out of the 6 completed rounds. yet each judge had lee winning 4 rounds chavez 2, and only 2 judges had the same rounds.

so even though andy lee was getting pounded he was winning rounds because chavez jr was taking most of the round off and lee was much much busier with punches.

but i'm telling you look at lee's face and you know he wasn't getting hit much but when he was it was hard not to mention the pounding body shots he was taken.

what that means is judges are rewarding the busier fighter not the power punches. i'm telling you something is changing with the way judges are scoring.

i could see the very same thing the pac/bradley fight. pacman was taking the first minute, minute and a half off each round the whole night. meanwhile bradley just peppering with bb gun slaps all the while scoring. pacmans monster shots did not count for more just like chavez jr.

[wreck]

Originally Posted by ipaman something is happening in boxing and i don't think it is a conspiracy. if you watched the chavez jr vs lee fight you would see chavez won at least 4 out of the 6 completed rounds. yet each judge had lee winning 4 rounds chavez 2, and only 2 judges had the same rounds. so even though andy lee was getting pounded he was winning rounds because chavez jr was taking most of the round off and lee was much much busier with punches. but i'm telling you look at lee's face and you know he wasn't getting hit much but when he was it was hard not to mention the pounding body shots he was taken. what that means is judges are rewarding the busier fighter not the power punches. i'm telling you something is changing with the way judges are scoring. i could see the very same thing the pac/bradley fight. pacman was taking the first minute, minute and a half off each round the whole night. meanwhile bradley just peppering with bb gun slaps all the while scoring. pacmans monster shots did not count for more just like chavez jr.

You may be on to something. It may not be a conspiracy but in a way maybe boxing is looking to move towards more action. Maybe they are feeling the heat from MMA.

[Kim]

The judges are just old and can't see ringside. I believe studies have been shown that the video monitors show better angles, and that the judges have the right to use that technology, but they're tech deficient and don't use all available tools.

[Cohete Rojo]

Originally Posted by Geaux Rockets Interesting video showing the ridiculous bias the HBO commentators showed towards Pacquiao. Lampley should be ashamed of himself.

Not sure what Lederman was thinking. One round for Bradley? Rounds 7 and 8 were some of his best and he gave them to Pacquiao.

[ObamaFan]

Originally Posted by Cohete Rojo Not sure what Lederman was thinking. One round for Bradley? Rounds 7 and 8 were some of his best and he gave them to Pacquiao.

They did the same thing againist Marquez

i feel bad for JMM

[what]

WBO scores fight for Manny Pacquiao
Updated: June 20, 2012, 11:42 PM ET
By Dan Rafael | ESPN.com

The WBO completed its review Wednesday of Timothy Bradley's controversial split-decision victory against Manny Pacquiao with its five-member international judging panel all scoring the fight for Pacquiao, even though the official result will stand.

“

Pacquiao My supporters shouldn't worry. We're going to get that title.
” -- Manny Pacquiao on wanting a rematch
with Timothy Bradley

Pacquiao told The Associated Press from the Philippines on Thursday that he would prefer a rematch rather than Bradley giving up the WBO welterweight title that he won on a split decision because "people may think I just usurped it."

Bradley's June 9 victory instantly became one of the most controversial decisions in boxing history. While judges Duane Ford and C.J. Ross both had Bradley winning 115-113, Jerry Roth scored it 115-113 for Pacquiao, who suffered his first defeat since 2005.

"My supporters shouldn't worry. We're going to get that title," Pacquiao said.

The HBO broadcasters and nearly every media member at ringside had Pacquiao winning. The crowd at the MGM Grand booed the decision heavily and there was fan outrage around the world from people believing Pacquiao clearly had won.

In the aftermath of the fight, WBO president Francisco "Paco" Valcarcel, whose organization sanctioned the title match, said he would have five judges review the video of the bout. On Wednesday, the results of that review were released. The five judges, whom Valcarcel said are accomplished judges with world title experience -- but whose names were not disclosed -- scored the fight for Pacquiao, 118-110, 117-111, 117-111, 116-112 and 115-113.

Valcarcel said the WBO has no authority to change the result. But given the outcome of the panel's review of the fight, he will order a rematch if Top Rank promoter Bob Arum declines to put on a second fight, or if Pacquiao opts not to exercise his rematch clause.

Top Rank and Pacquiao, however, simply could move on to another fight that just would not be for the WBO title.

Rafael's Boxing Blog

Rafael Get the latest scoop and analysis on the world of boxing from ESPN.com's Dan Rafael in his blog.

"We can't change the result but we did this review for two reasons," Valcarcel told ESPN.com. "If they want to make a rematch, we will approve the rematch and if they don't, we will order one. Also, we wanted to show (the Nevada State Athletic Commission) that they could bring in other officials from outside of Nevada who can also do a fine job judging fights. It's good to have different officials."

Nevada generally selects officials from its own pool of in-state judges.

"We want to work together with Nevada and we think they should be open to other good officials from around the world," Valcarcel said. "But we are not questioning the honorability of the judges who scored the fight for Bradley. They are honest people. They are good officials, too, but I don't know what happened."

Valcarcel, who was ringside for the bout, said he scored it for Pacquiao, "but we have to respect the judges."

Pacquiao is due to return to the ring on Nov. 10 and has the option of an immediate rematch with Bradley in his contract. After the fight, Pacquiao said he wanted the rematch and Bradley also said he would like to fight Pacquiao, which would mean even more money than the career-high guarantee of $5 million he received. However, since the fight, Top Rank's talk of a rematch has cooled.

The five judges, whom Valcarcel said are accomplished judges with world title experience -- but whose names were not disclosed -- scored the fight for Pacquiao by scores of 118-110, 117-111, 117-111, 116-112 and 115-113.

Arum, who promotes Pacquiao and Bradley but who also was outraged by the decision, was pleased with Valcarcel's review.

"Paco acted very responsibly," Arum said. "I think what they did was fine."

Arum, however, did not address the rematch.

"I'm not talking about it now," he said.

After the fight, Arum was so disgusted that he called for the Nevada Attorney General to investigate the scoring. Arum told ESPN.com that he met in his Las Vegas office Wednesday with a chief investigator and a deputy from the Nevada Attorney General's office.

"I think they will look into the whole situation, but I don't think there is any wrongdoing here and we can go on with our lives," he said.

[wallyj12]

I wonder how much money CJ Ross and Duane Ford got paid

[wallyj12]

This is a good article that exposes how inept/corrupt Duane Ford is..

DUANE FORD STRIKES AGAIN! By Rich Mazon PhilBoxing.com Sun, 17 Jun 2012 Duane Ford. Duane Ford decided to once again come out in the open and explain his controversial judging of last week’s bout between Manny Pacquiao and Timothy Bradley. And once again, he came not only short but with confusing and baffling answers to the hottest topic in sports nowadays. Ford was one of the special guests in Jim Lampley’s HBO program called “The Fight Game” which tackled the arguable decision that Ford alongside fellow judge C.J. Ross came up with in that mega fight in Las Vegas a week ago. Ford first defended the qualifications of himself and his two other fellow judges that night stating that “they are not trainees” and adding that the three of them have a combined 350 plus world title fights between them. He further states that all of them saw and agreed that Pacquiao and Bradley fought a close fight last June 9th. It is an observation that the fans of the sport strongly disagrees with. Majority that watched the fight both at the MGM Grand and worldwide through television thinks that the Filipino boxer won the fight and that he won it convincingly as well. “What I personally saw that night, is that the first six rounds, clearly Pacquiao was the winner. It was an exciting six rounds,” stated Ford during the interview with Lampley. Wait! He said what? He saw Pacquiao clearly winning six rounds of the twelve round championship fight. Then why did he only give five rounds to Pacquiao in his score cards? If he thinks that the then defending champion won six of the twelve, then the least he could score it was a draw for both fighters. Twelve minus six equals six, right Mr. Ford? Mr. Ford did not stop there. He further defended his actions that night by saying “What I saw on the fourth round is that Pacquiao clearly won that. He hurt Bradley. But the Manny Pacquiao that I judged in the past would have finished him. He let him off the hook. “ Wait again! Did Ford judge Pacquiao’s performance not because of what he saw happening in the ring that night but instead compared him to the Pacquiao of the past? When did comparison of present and past performances become a factor in judging a fight? If that was one of the factors that he used in judging that fight, then his scores should not only be examined but he should be questioned by the Nevada Athletic Commission as well. He clearly is using the wrong criteria in judging a boxing fight. He is clearly biased on old performances of fighters versus the way the fight unfolds in front of his eyes. No wonder he came up with that score card. He should not be allowed to judge again based on this statement of his. He looks not on the fight itself but on what he perceived that fighter was once capable of doing. He clearly has it wrong. Mr. Ford’s bloopers did not stop there on last night’s TV appearance. He further states that Pacquiao “in the later rounds, I thought he tired and his punches were missing a bit.” Wait, wait Mr. Ford. Missing a BIT? What exactly did you see that night sir? Did he miss or did he not, did he score or did he not? There is no “bit” in judging a fight. What exactly did you see? Or what exactly did you not see? Duane Ford was very vocal of his actions right after the fight. He defended his appalling scoring of a fight that the world saw differently. He told the Las Vegas Review Journal that he thought “Bradley gave Pacquiao a boxing lesson.” A comment that is uncalled for, given the issue at hand. Ford’s comment at that time was not only ill-advised, it is also arrogant. But Duane Ford’s appearance on television last night and he making those remarks just added to the debate that he has erred in judging the Pacquiao-Bradley match. His explanations were absurd and downright confusing. He puts himself in a deeper hole with every statement he makes. Mr. Ford should just remain silent from hereon and stop embarrassing himself and the sport. He has done enough damage already. He needs to stop defending his controversial work that night with equally controversial answers. He should stop representing other boxing judges, because he cannot. Despite his years of experience in the sport, he has only become a poster boy for erroneous and incompetent judging because of his actions last week and his remarks thereafter. If Duane Ford thinks that Timothy Bradley gave Manny Pacquiao a boxing lesson, then maybe someone should give him a simple MATH LESSON. Mr. Ford… 12 - 6 = 6!

http://philboxing.com/news/story-71961.html

[Cohete Rojo]

Originally Posted by wallyj12 This is a good article that exposes how inept/corrupt Duane Ford is.. http://philboxing.com/news/story-71961.html

Again, people reaching at straws because they were emotionally hurt by the decision; they will find what they want. Many people wanted to see the Pacquiao vs. Mayweather fight, but this loss puts that on hold and changes the appeal of such a fight.

[vlaurelio]

Originally Posted by Cohete Rojo Again, people reaching at straws because they were emotionally hurt by the decision; they will find what they want. Many people wanted to see the Pacquiao vs. Mayweather fight, but this loss puts that on hold and changes the appeal of such a fight.

are you saying the quotes below are just made up and Mr Ford didn't actually say them?

“What I personally saw that night, is that the first six rounds, clearly Pacquiao was the winner. It was an exciting six rounds,”

“What I saw on the fourth round is that Pacquiao clearly won that. He hurt Bradley. But the Manny Pacquiao that I judged in the past would have finished him. He let him off the hook. “

[Cohete Rojo]

Originally Posted by vlaurelio are you saying the quotes below are just made up and Mr Ford didn't actually say them? “What I personally saw that night, is that the first six rounds, clearly Pacquiao was the winner. It was an exciting six rounds,” “What I saw on the fourth round is that Pacquiao clearly won that. He hurt Bradley. But the Manny Pacquiao that I judged in the past would have finished him. He let him off the hook. “

Taking quotes out of context and twisting them to meet a predetermined decission is what I was referring.

No where in that article does Ford ever say Pacquiao won each of the first six rounds, nor does he say he judged Pacquiao on that night based upon his apparent method of "letting Bradley off the hook".

[Angkor Wat]

Originally Posted by ipaman something is happening in boxing and i don't think it is a conspiracy. if you watched the chavez jr vs lee fight you would see chavez won at least 4 out of the 6 completed rounds. yet each judge had lee winning 4 rounds chavez 2, and only 2 judges had the same rounds. so even though andy lee was getting pounded he was winning rounds because chavez jr was taking most of the round off and lee was much much busier with punches. but i'm telling you look at lee's face and you know he wasn't getting hit much but when he was it was hard not to mention the pounding body shots he was taken. what that means is judges are rewarding the busier fighter not the power punches. i'm telling you something is changing with the way judges are scoring. i could see the very same thing the pac/bradley fight. pacman was taking the first minute, minute and a half off each round the whole night. meanwhile bradley just peppering with bb gun slaps all the while scoring. pacmans monster shots did not count for more just like chavez jr.

This is nothing new. Everyone scores a fight differently. Personally, I had the fight pretty even until Lee got TKO. I tend to favor the more active fighter, who lands the cleaner, harder punches and defense/counter punching comes into play as well. I dislike fighters that run and hold, and ones that play it safe and don't take chances.

Originally Posted by Cohete Rojo Taking quotes out of context and twisting them to meet a predetermined decission is what I was referring. No where in that article does Ford ever say Pacquiao won each of the first six rounds, nor does he say he judged Pacquiao on that night based upon his apparent method of "letting Bradley off the hook".

I'm not going to argue the 6 rounds part because he could have just meant Pacman ws winning the fight after six, not necessarily all six rounds. But if you watched 'The Fight Game w/ Jim Lampley, in which they aired the entire Duane Ford interview, he mentions that the "old Pacquiao" would have finished him off. He doesn't have to literally say he judge the fight based on that method, the fact the he mentioned it while explaining his scores shows it played some factor.

That's the wrong way to judge. That alone affects scoring. What do previous fights have to do with the current one? You judge the fight based on the fight itself. Not what he should have done or what he has done in the past. Fighters should be judged on a clean slate. That is where he is wrong here.

Also, if you watched the interview, sounds like he clearly read off a TelePrompter. Sounded way too scripted. Just adding more fuel for the conspiracy theorist.