Official 2013 Boxing Thread: Year is over, please lock.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Peterson, Devon and Witter were all undefeated, legit champions and near their peak when he dominated (except Junior) them. That's all real competition.

The fight with Manny just exposed that he can't fight Manny and win. Everyone has different definitions of the best. It shouldn't get thrown out that he fought the best at 140 and dominated them.
 
I'm not a fan of Bradley either, but as of late people are judging him solely based off his Pacquiao and Provodnikov fights. What about the times he dominated Lamont Peterson and Devon Alexander when they were undefeated? Or when he was dead broke and went to Junior Witter's backyard to take the title from him? He may not have flashiness, but he doesn't have quit in him. Every time he got knocked down, he came back up fighting.


Because in boxing you're measured only against the BEST. That fight with PAC (dispite the obvious fix) exposed him. Money may Is the best because he's never been exposed. In this era of boxing where real competition is few and far between, those fights against top fighters (some say the top at the time) account for a lot.

The very best fighters have had losses and questionable wins. Pacquiao had losses on his record before he became this Megastar. So does Juan Marquez, Wladamir Klitschko, and Bernard Hopkins. They had some losses against some not-so-great opponents. Mayweather Jr has his controversial "win" over Castillo. Even the best fighters will eventually run into a problematic style. Nobody is comparing Bradley to Mayweather as far as greatness. The only time the two names are mentioned together is for a potential fight. To see if he measures up with the best, why shouldn't Bradley fight him? It's an intriguing match up for a few reasons. 1. He's undefeated, at least on paper. 2. He has a seemingly unbreakable will. 3. Mayweather hasn't faced a "slick black fighter" in quite some time.
 
The very best fighters have had losses and questionable wins. Pacquiao had losses on his record before he became this Megastar. So does Juan Marquez, Wladamir Klitschko, and Bernard Hopkins. They had some losses against some not-so-great opponents. Mayweather Jr has his controversial "win" over Castillo. Even the best fighters will eventually run into a problematic style. Nobody is comparing Bradley to Mayweather as far as greatness. The only time the two names are mentioned together is for a potential fight. To see if he measures up with the best, why shouldn't Bradley fight him? It's an intriguing match up for a few reasons. 1. He's undefeated, at least on paper. 2. He has a seemingly unbreakable will. 3. Mayweather hasn't faced a "slick black fighter" in quite some time.

I never said Bradley shouldn't fight him and I agree with what you're saying. Boxing is a difficult sport to measure. So many variables when it comes to tallying up who's better than who or who's the #1 contender, so on and so forth...
 
Enjoyed that No Mas 30 for 30. Always heard of Duran, but never really watched any of his fights.
 
Last edited:
Documentary was OK. Not sure what we learned.

Interesting Duran outlasted Leonard in their 1st fight with Panama Lewis in his corner, who interestingly was not in his corner in the 2nd fight. Would like to know what happened there.
 
Duran shouldn't have fought Leonard so soon after the first fight. He was still celebrating. Dude quit because he was out of shape.
 
I know I am a little late but after looking at last few pages, about Bradley much criticism comes from his fight against a rough and rugged fighter Provodnikov.

This dude is a beast always coming forward and would make many non-counter punching fighters look bad. If he had the fan base to back him you would see more big names fight him just because he throws witht he best of them.

His defense may lack but he has a great chin. Most big names will avoid Provodnikov bc of this alone and he would test most great fighters who's strength is not in counter punching

I commend Bradley for taking a dangerous fight and changing his style to make that fight exiciting, if he boxes he dominates him but in that fight he didnt

Just like FLoyds fight vs Cotto, there is no way u can tell me that there fight will be nearly as close the next time around.

Floyd will purely box Cotto unlike their last fight
 
I commend Bradley for taking a dangerous fight and changing his style to make that fight exiciting, if he boxes he dominates him but in that fight he didnt
 
 Agreed 100%. People seriously criticizing him for going outside of his safe zone and making it exciting for the fans AND winning? Man pls 
mean.gif
 
I commend Bradley for taking a dangerous fight and changing his style to make that fight exiciting, if he boxes he dominates him but in that fight he didnt

 
 Agreed 100%. People seriously criticizing him for going outside of his safe zone and making it exciting for the fans AND winning? Man pls :smh:

Yeah get a concussion for fans, that is real smart. :rolleyes

All those "fans" he gained from the Provodnikov fight he lost after the Marquez fight.

It may have been an exciting fight but it was very stupid.
 
Without the Provodnikov fight, he isn't in a PPV.

I don't see how he would lose any fans from Saturday. Just because it wasn't a brawl?
 
Last edited:
Without the Provodnikov fight, he isn't in a PPV.

I don't see how he would lose any fans from Saturday. Just because it wasn't a brawl?


Bradley didn't lose any of his real fans after the Marquez fight because they know that is how he normally boxes his opponents but
the new "fans" that only watched him against Pac and Provodnikov definitely aren't still fans. They want to see Bradley in rock 'em
sock 'em robot type fights every time he fights. Until he has another fight like Provodnikov those "fans" will be saying the same thing they
say about other boxers who box "This is boring", "He ran the whole fight", "This guy is wack".
 
Being that it is Niketalk, Bradley's Nike nightmare came robe and trunks were sick.

Boxing scoring question:


If fighter A lands 35 Jabs and fighter B lands 20 hard hooks/uppers/overhands , who would u give the round to? The boxer who is tapping and making sure he gets in and out or the puncher who is trying to land punches and mix it up?
 
Last edited:
Bradley just isn't that marketable. That's why he's trying hard to reinvent his image.

No doubt. But still he did co-star in a PPV this past weekend. No Pacquiao and no Mayweather. There's only been one other PPV in the past seven years that didn't feature them (Sergio/JCC). That's saying a lot. I know HBO and Showtime are trying to ramp up their PPV events, but still that's a huge plus for Bradley.

And when I've done my own little fan-scoring, I don't really take too much notice about who hits more of a certain punch. What matters to me is who controls the round. Who would I rather be at the end of a round. Who hurt their opponent more. Who had better, polished defense. Who landed the cleanest blows with most effect. It's a balance. It's not so cut and dry. And it varies by boxer, depending on what style earns them points.

Manny does it with tremendous accuracy and volume. Floyd does it with style and finesse. Ward does it with grinding and rough-house tactics. JMM with counter-punching and solid boxing fundamentals. GGG and Matthyse do it with amazing power punching.
 
Last edited:
Bradley just isn't that marketable. That's why he's trying hard to reinvent his image.

No doubt. But still he did co-star in a PPV this past weekend. No Pacquiao and no Mayweather. There's only been one other PPV in the past seven years that didn't feature them (Sergio/JCC). That's saying a lot. I know HBO and Showtime are trying to ramp up their PPV events, but still that's a huge plus for Bradley.

Hopkins vs Dawson, Cotto vs Margarito I, and II were PPV. Might be a few others we both forgot. Nonetheless, I see your point. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Being that it is Niketalk, Bradley's Nike nightmare came robe and trunks were sick.

Boxing scoring question:


If fighter A lands 35 Jabs and fighter B lands 20 hard hooks/uppers/overhands , who would u give the round to? The boxer who is tapping and making sure he gets in and out or the puncher who is trying to land punches and mix it up?

Gotta gimme a little more than that :lol: but I'll take a shot.

I hate to put names into the equation...but if A is a Manny type fighter (coming forward, pressing the action), following up the jab a bit and pushing B back to just throw those off the ropes...I may give it to A. If B is a Hatton/Maidana type, straight a head and forcing A to retreat and jab off the ropes or jab and run...I'd probably lean B. There's just so many factors :lol:
 
Being that it is Niketalk, Bradley's Nike nightmare came robe and trunks were sick.

Boxing scoring question:


If fighter A lands 35 Jabs and fighter B lands 20 hard hooks/uppers/overhands , who would u give the round to? The boxer who is tapping and making sure he gets in and out or the puncher who is trying to land punches and mix it up?

I would do the e.a sports fight night scoring system, which is score it to the dude landing hooks and upper cuts
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom