Sports with judges deciding the winner: Figure Skating Synchronized Swimming Gymnastics Diving Boxing Embarrassing. Boxing blows.
Simple matter really. There are only two mainstream combat sports available, MMA and Boxing. While there are elitists on both sides, there are a lot of casuals right in between making up a large portions of the PPV buys. From what I've heard, the general consensus is that the Pacman Bradley decision was absurd and rigged as hell, and a lot of people are pissed off about shelling out 60 bucks to watch it. PPV's are expensive, all I'm saying is, some of these pissed off buyers, many of those are casuals fans that watches both MMA and boxing, might think twice about buying the next boxing PPV and choosing a UFC event instead. Will this make a huge impact on PPV buys? Probably not, plus it's hard to really measure it. The point is, this decision only impacts MMA in a positive way, no matter big or small simply because UFC has had a pretty clean slate when it comes to judging where as Boxing has had a history of bad rep with corruption, bribery or what not. If you don't watch watch boxing, the only mainstream alternative the combat world is MMA.
The good thing about WWF is that their fans will admit its fake - boxing fans on the other hand are some of the most delusional and defensive ever.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/BvTNyKIGXiI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I don't disagree. But MMA is usually 3 or 5 rounds, which makes it easier to score than boxing. Plus the known robberies in UFC such as Nam Phan, Garcia are not really huge main events.
I was trying to remember who it was that had the fight the way I did. It was Brian Kenny, who had called the fight for top rank's (streaming) feed, which is the feed that I was watching. Brian Kenny believed that Bradley won the fight fair and square and he said so on the broadcast after the decision. While most of pac supporters in this conspiracy theorist mode all seem to point to the middle rounds 4, 5 and 6, to justify pac's claim that he won the fight and they discount the later rounds or they just say that Bradley was running. Which was not the case.
what, I don't like your usage of which in the last sentence. You could change the period before which to a comma and use "which", which seems better. OK, what? You my boy, what. Props to you, sir, for calling this fight BEFORE Pac got robbed.
Arum is really trying to cover his tracks. _____ Top Rank requests ‘complete inquiry’ into Pacquiao-Bradley decision http://mma-boxing.si.com/2012/06/11...uiao-bradley-decision/?sct=hp_t2_a4&eref=sihp
I watched it again. I even tried to be biased towards Bradley. Only ended up with 8-4 Pacquiao. Sorry, I just don't see how to give the guy the win when he was fighting to survive. People said Bradley did better later on in the fight but I thought he did more in the first half. He wasn't trying to win, looked like he was in survival mode and backpedaled his way into the final round. I love how people are like, you have to watch the fight with no sound, Top rank feed if possible (like there's no bias there either), alone in a room, no food or water, while standing on one foot and bending 3 toes, with 2 friends in separate rooms in the house, facing the forth wall in the room with a book on his head, while scratching the tip of your nose every 36 seconds. And then you can judge the fight properly. LOL Bradley himself didn't think he won. His corner didn't sound confident in between rounds. When a fighter, says he has to watch the tape to see if he won or not, that says a lot. When non Pacquiao supporters, some of pacquiaos hardest critics like Teddy atlas and Roger Mayweather, who dont drink the Manny koolaid, says Manny got robbed. That says something.
I watched it again last night. No way for Bradley to win that fight. It was not even close. Maybe those three senile judges think that Manny's glove was his head. And thanks to What for admitting his real source. I was almost thinking that he's got connections to the Vegas mafia. It's easy to get influenced when you're a Pac hater.
there was one big event between Machida and Jackson. If you don't remember, Jackson already admitted that he lost by raising the arm of Lyoto. Then he got declared a champion.
Dude, my REAL sources? I guess you didn't get that I was scoring the fight myself. What I was doing was pointing out that others saw the fight similar to how I saw it, because everybody here was saying that NOBODY had Bradley winning the fight. Mario Lopez was also on THAT FEED and he was outraged by the decision. You could tell that Lopez thought manny won the fight.
Here is what Bart Barry said about the fight: My ringside scorecard had Bradley by a point, 116-115. I gave the new champion rounds 2, 6, 7, 11 and 12. I gave Pacquiao rounds 3, 4, 9 and 10. I scored rounds 1, 5 and 8 even. Am I entirely confident of my card’s accuracy? Actually, no. I marked with an asterisk five rounds as either/or affairs, and I scored another three even. But I am certain of my card’s truthfulness – another thing Monet was after. Despite sitting ringside for no fewer than 400 prizefights during my time as a boxing writer, I was not at all sure of what I was seeing Saturday night. Which raises a genuine suspicion for me about the origin of others’ loud certainty. Three professional judges disagreed seven of 12 times. Reasonable writers at MGM Grand, intelligent men with proven cognitive aptitudes, colored a wide array with their opinions. The only ones sure of their infallibility were a few usual suspects at ringside, compensated for what they know more than what they discover, and the entire HBO pay-per-view audience. Let that be a commentary on the viewing experience, not the reality, and know better than to demand of ringsiders a review of Saturday’s telecast to find the wrong of their ways. We were there, friends; we know what we saw, and what we saw was the real thing, unfiltered, thanks. Timothy Bradley did not fight well as even his supporters believed he would need to fight to beat Pacquiao. Hobbled and often unexpectedly reluctant, Bradley followed a questionable counterpunching strategy designed in his camp to preclude him from being the Ricky Hatton-redux Pacquiao prepared for. And Pacquiao, to his credit, fought considerably better than most anticipated he would. There was a tone of disbelief in the media center at the postfight press conference. Part resulted from having not seen Pacquiao lose in 15 highly visible fights. There was confusion, a product of the result’s unusualness. Pacquiao lost to Marquez by a much wider margin than this in November, the thinking went, and he got that decision. This, therefore, is an outrage. To score a fight impartially, one must look at the neutral plane between the fighters and follow any punch that enters that plane to its destination. Does anyone do this? No. Scorers select a narrative, often not consciously – “Pacquiao will catch Bradley coming in with those wide punches and beat him down,” say – and look to see it disproved, if they’re scientific, or proved (if they’re human). With few exceptions, Saturday’s fight showed an observer whatever he was looking for. If a scorer believed that Pacquiao, returned to his wildman and free-hurling ways, could hurt Bradley with most any punch he landed, he saw that every time Bradley swung his upper body like a windshield wiper. If a scorer believed that Bradley, quicker of reflex and less relenting than Pacquiao’s recent opponents, could grind the underconditioned Congressman to exhaustion in the championship rounds, he saw that instead. More observers looked for Pacquiao to win. More observers saw Pacquiao win. Pacquiao did catch Bradley with left uppercuts, though not nearly as many as he should have with a guy who put his chin on a tee every time he ducked rightwards. And the only time Pacquiao had Bradley in distress was when he flurried crazily with 10 obtusely angled punches, and four or five landed. Bradley kept his right hand high – no Hatton redux, he – fought Pacquiao off him, held when he had to, and closed stronger than Pacquiao, confirming many prefight worries about the Filipino’s once-vaunted conditioning. Bradley also landed several punches, like a right cross in the fight’s opening 90 seconds, the partisan-Pacquiao crowd took no account of. Promoter Bob Arum donned his performance garb in the media center afterwards, took an oath – a few oaths really – to ensure a rematch on November 10, and protested mightily the fight’s official outcome. Were this Shakespeare, in fact, Hamlet’s mother would have said Arum protested a bit too much. Bart Barry can be reached at bart.barrys.email (at) gmail.com
