- Joined
- Mar 1, 2012
- Messages
- 20,193
- Reaction score
- 7
Yeah, if only there was some way to profit from knowing the result of a fight before hand.
Proof?
Yeah, if only there was some way to profit from knowing the result of a fight before hand.
Survival mode?
Proof?
He asked who could possibly profit, I said someone betting on the upset, can you read?
Yes.
lol, you do know that pac even landed more jabs bradley
It was.
Honestly the round was close until Bradley spent the entire last minute in survival mode, after which I don't see how anyone could consider it his.
you're a moron. Didn't you read what he said. Even jabs that don't land count. Bradley threw more jabs. Therefore bradley wins.
Boxing really is such a science that you should know these facts (jabbing to the air or your opponent's gloves score more points than solid straights to the face) or just stfu.
Yeah, if only there was some way to profit from knowing the result of a fight before hand.
I think it wouldhave been better to leave the scorecard thread up. We know the majority think Pac won the fight, a poll will prove nothing. I'm personally more interested in how many saw a close fight.
The poll could be set up such that the options are the amount of rounds scored for each fighter/ or the 6 or so most likely scores. Granted that would be 6 or 7 options, but I think that's easily enough done.
A. 117-111 Pac (or higher)
B. 116-112 Pac
C. 115-113 Pac
D. 114-114 Draw
E. 115-113 Bradley
F. 116-112 Bradley (or higher)
Look, I troll people a lot here but I'm serious as can be in fight RBR threads. I didn't pay attention to anyones score until around the 10th round other than Ledermans scorecard which I just thought was absurd.
At the end of 12 watching the live broadcast, I had a score of 114-114. At that point I noticed that people were quoting me, saying I didn't understand boxing, Pac won every round except maybe one. Suddenly the scores are read and all 3 officials judges have it within one point of my score. Do you think I could have known the judges would score it the way they did? Also from what I understand, other ppv feeds had different commentators who saw a close fight. Posters I know from this site who know boxing pretty well saw a close fight.
I watched the fight a second time and I had it exactly the same except I gave Bradley the 4th when I had given it to Pac on my first viewing.
You can say I'm conceited or whatever you like but I'm going to go ahead and say that people truly don't understand how to score a fight anymore. Compubox has nothing to do with judging. Punching "hard" is not something judges score. There is a difference between aggression and effective aggression. For example, Harold Lederman said Pac was winning the rounds because "he does too much damage with the left hand." What was he basing this on? Bradley was never knocked down. He had no swelling, no cuts. Manny did though.
The poll could be set up such that the options are the amount of rounds scored for each fighter/ or the 6 or so most likely scores. Granted that would be 6 or 7 options, but I think that's easily enough done.
A. 117-111 Pac (or higher)
B. 116-112 Pac
C. 115-113 Pac
D. 114-114 Draw
E. 115-113 Bradley
F. 116-112 Bradley (or higher)
Its not absurd and thats just how it is.Being visibly affected by a punch (staggering backward, losing balance, or desperate hugging are indicators) matters to me. A knockdown/cut is not necessary. You said somewhere that a punch that doesn't cause a KD "is just another punch". To me that is absurd. But if that's what's written in the rulebook (which I don't know about), perhaps Bradley did win.
Lets say it is a fix, who would you say fixed it and why?
B. for me.
C. for Jerry Roth.
E. for CJ Roth.
E. for Duane Ford.