# Marquez beat Bradley. Watch with fresh eyes if you want to contest my rounds.



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

It's boring up in here, let's get controversial.

I don't care what anyone says, accuse me of bias, whatever. Bradley used smoke and mirrors to give the illusion that he was in control and that he was winning the fight, celebrating after every round ended, putting his hands down, etc. The commentary on Sky or Boxnation (whatever this is) was atrocious and I don't remember it being great on HBO either. But it was JMM who round after round landed the better punches, with all other criteria being mostly very even. Now the rounds were very close, don't get me wrong, but JMM was able to set himself apart in a majority of rounds. It seemed like from the way people talked, the burden was on him to prove he was winning, like he had to take the rounds from Bradley. As long as Bradley didn't get hit too hard too often, he auto-won the rounds.

I thought JMM won it when the fight had just happened and over a year later I decided to score it again. People let the Pacquiao KO and Provodnikov fights cloud their vision and because Bradley was simply surviving and making JMM miss they were giving him rounds. His jabs missed more often than landed, and while he had some signature punches in the fight that look good in a highlight real (Rounds 1, 5, 10, 12) he did not land flush with frequency. Marquez on the other hand was the only one to land flush power shots in several rounds and they went unnoticed. Commentators were too enamored with Bradley posing and looking cool. Ring generalship was largely even in this fight and control of the ring was balanced; whenever Tim had JMM reaching he wasn't putting much forth himself.

If you want to contest me, watch it again now, with fresh eyes like I did, and tell me what rounds I got wrong (11 and 12 you'll have to find elsewhere).






My RBR:



Spoiler



1-*Marquez;* a few solid counter hooks make the difference.
2-So hard to split them.* Tim* because of that last clean punch. 
3*-Clear JMM round*, landed hard rights, Bradley barely anything of note; 
4-*JMM steals it* in the last minute with the best punches of the round after being slightly behind by a few jabs
5-*JMM knicks it for me*; landed the harder power punches in the last round before Bradley taunts, hits him with a jab, then wobbles from JMM's right hand at the bell. 
6-*JMM knicks it* in the last minute landing a few hard right hands that set him apart. Close round.
7-*JMM knicks it again.* In the early rounds, he landed a few rights, then was about equal in jabs for Tim. Tim didn't do anything but fall short with his jab and backstep the last minute of the fight, while JMM landed a couple of body shots. 
8-*Bradley knicks it.* Early Bradley lands a jab then misses a ton, in the middle of the round JMM lands a flush right and then a clean body shot. They trade lefts and Bradley gets the better one off, then lands a right, then a little counter hook. JMM lands a body shot. Bradley spams jabs, some land. JMM lands a right then a small left. 
9-*Clear JMM. *Bradley lands a quick double left hook. JMM reaches with a right downstairs, then gets a jab. Left upstairs and downstairs. Lead right. Another right. Bradley lands two body shots. Jab. Little left. Counter jab. Right by Tim. Left upper by JMM. Grazing 1-2. Two good counters by JMM. Then a right. Body shot. 
10-*Marquez knicks it.* jab to the body from Tim. Right from Bradley, grazing 3-2 from JMM. Jab from JMM. 1-1-2 from JMM; hard right hand from Tim; another right from JMM; they trade body shots. Little 1-2 from JMM. Two jabs from Tim. Jab to the body from JMM. JMM lands two left hooks. 
11-*Bradley close.* Tim lands a jab. Counter right from JMM. A right after pushing Tim off him. JMM lands a small uppercut. Bradley lands 3 out of 4 punches in a combination. Counter right by Tim. Counter right by JMM. Jab by JMM, body shot by Bradley in clinch. Little left by JMM. Little left by Tim. Another. Little lefts by JMM. Right hand by Tim. 
12-*Bradley. *rights by each. They trade body shots. Hard right by JMM. Little right by Tim. Hard right by JMM. Bradley tries to look cool with his hands down. Little 2-3 by JMM. Little left by Tim. Jab by Tim. Jab by JMM. 1-2 by Tim, right by JMM. Big left by Tim.



My highlights of biased commentary:



Spoiler



Round 2, Bradley walks into a big right hand that forces him downwards, commentators say nothing.

Round 5, 23:05, JMM lands a big right to counter a hook then a left of his own, they credit Bradley's left. JMM then lands 2 big rights and the commentators just go on about how controlled Bradley is.

Round 6-â€a punch (from JMM) gets in once in a while but it's not stopping Bradley, not one little bitâ€. Stopping him from what? Are they shocked he's not crumbling from every JMM punch? It's not a high-volume fight in Tim's favor either.

At the end of round 7 they can't stop sucking Tim's cock.

At the end of the 8 they talk about JMM having sporadic success, reaching and chasing; the burden seems squarely on him to win impressively, not on Bradley who gets accolades for having his hands down and not getting KO'd.

Round 9, Bradley hasn't landed a clean shot in 2 minutes and the commentators are going on about how he's slipping and sliding.

By the 11th, Scottish dude â€œcan't make a caseâ€ for Marquez winning.



Come at me.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Super Kalleb said:


> close rounds, but i think JMM won.





KO KING95 said:


> I thought Marquez edged it tbh. :conf





J.R. said:


> Close fight. I might've given it to Marquez.
> 
> HBO doing a huge suck job with Bradley. Piece of shit scumbags they are.





Executioner said:


> you cant give more than 4 rounds to bradley





Brauer said:


> 7-5 Marquez, could go either way





Teeto said:


> I had this for Marquez, I think the commentators are insane and biased as fuck





voodoo5 said:


> I thought Marquez fought the better fight, and Bradley had some good moments in the middle. Bradley fights ugly.
> He is the John Ruiz of 140-150.





artful said:


> Marquez robbed again.


Hello boys, feel free to chime in after a second watch if you like.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Complete version:

[video=dailymotion;x16hr1q]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x16hr1q_juan-manuel-marquez-vs-timothy-bradley-12-10-2013-hd_sport[/video]


----------



## Pedrin1787 (Dec 24, 2013)

I need to watch it again...I thought the fight was way closer than some people admitted to but I had Bradley winning.


----------



## Zopilote (Jun 5, 2013)

JMM is my current favorite, but I still had Bradley winning a close one..

I'll have to watch this again.


----------



## tezel8764 (May 16, 2013)




----------



## Boogle McDougal (Jun 8, 2012)

I'll watch it again with the intent of scoring it for Marquez - I mean I will remain objective.

I think it's funny you're accusing Tim Bradley of winning the fight with "smoke and mirrors." Would be funny if he did use actual smoke and mirrors.

_"You can beat a stationary fighter Juan, but you cannot beat... magic!" (poof!)_


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

I also had Marquez winning, thought he scored the more meaningful punches, but the fight was so close that I had no problem with Bradley winning.

The only thing that surprised me afterwards was that there was no controversy over the verdict as most close fights seem to bring.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Boggle said:


> I'll watch it again with the intent of scoring it for Marquez - I mean I will remain objective.
> 
> I think it's funny you're accusing Tim Bradley of winning the fight with "smoke and mirrors." Would be funny if he did use actual smoke and mirrors.
> 
> _"You can beat a stationary fighter Juan, but you cannot beat... magic!" (poof!)_


Word, he practices with the fam.












ElKiller said:


> I also had Marquez winning, thought he scored the more meaningful punches, but the fight was so close that I had no problem with Bradley winning.
> 
> The only thing that surprised me afterwards was that there was no controversy over the verdict as most close fights seem to bring.


Yeah I was surprised there was near-consensus for press row and online polls. Right after the fight I could swear HBO had a fan poll and 73% thought JMM won but I can't find it on video anymore.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

Scored it 3 times and had it to Bradley every time :conf


----------



## igor_otsky (Jul 24, 2012)

tezel8764 said:


>


OLE!


----------



## TSOL (Dec 15, 2013)

you have a case. IIRC Marquez was ahead of Bradley in power punches. I'm gonna watch this again, the people I saw this with know I'm a Marquez fan and wouldn't stfu :fire


----------



## Medicine (Jun 4, 2013)

Bradley beat him...very clearly, borderline easily. just stop.


----------



## saul_ir34 (Jun 8, 2013)

Same here. I was actually at the fight and the concensus was JMM was winning. I was sitting next to some Bradley fans and they said JMM edged it.

Very similar to the Canelo-Trout fight. They both landed but only one was landing the hard shots consistently.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Medicine said:


> Bradley beat him...very clearly, borderline easily. just stop.


Point out what rounds I got wrong. Watch it again and point out the rounds where Bradley landed the better punches over the round.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Chacal said:


> Scored it 3 times and had it to Bradley every time :conf


Rounds please.


----------



## w;dkm ckeqfjq c (Jul 26, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Rounds please.


I shall rewatch when I have time, didn't save my scorecards unfortunately.


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

Medicine said:


> Bradley beat him...very clearly, borderline easily. just stop.


Utter bullshit. :deal

It was a case of two extremes and a case can be made for either one.

One fighter fighting primarily off the back foot and winning the battle of the jab vs the aggressor who clearly and easily connected the more telling power punches.

It all comes down to what style you prefer or where your bias stands.


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

I'm ashamed to say I've never seen the fight. I'll watch it as soon as possible, with those fresh eyes of mine...


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Brownies said:


> I'm ashamed to say I've never seen the fight. I'll watch it as soon as possible, with those fresh eyes of mine...


Nice, thanks Brownies. I like you. Always have.



Chacal said:


> I shall rewatch when I have time, didn't save my scorecards unfortunately.


Appreciate it. You usually give detailed rbr's too.


----------



## Mexi-Box (Jun 4, 2013)

I scored it for Marquez too. I felt he threw the harder, better punches throughout. Well, I didn't really score it because I was watching it at a bar.


----------



## DBerry (Jun 11, 2013)

I felt Marquez won the fight when I first watched it, the only way Bradly won it is if the judges were amateur judges, really. how does a flurry on the gloves beat well timed, landed punch from the aggressive fighter?


----------



## Rexrapper 1 (Jun 4, 2013)

8-4 for Bradley. I haven't watched in a while though. I thought Bradley won clearly. Bradley did start clowning around a bit during the second half which made the fight a little closer.


----------



## genaro g (Jun 7, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Nice, thanks Brownies. I like you. Always have.
> 
> Appreciate it. You usually give detailed rbr's too.


Quit being so nice. Its disgusting...


----------



## PetetheKing (Aug 5, 2012)

I'll re-watch the fight because it's a great fight. It's a chess-match and I remember it being a technically interesting fight. I remember Bradley winning it pretty convincingly, thought Marquez was great in a losing effort, however. The Sky/Boxnation team was atrocious, though. Thought the fight was much closer and better than what they were letting on.


----------



## Sweethome_Bama (Jul 29, 2012)

Bradley outclassed him.
His jab was on point he wouldn't engage for long periods of time on in a pattern which took Marquez out of his countering gameplan.
The movement and jab was too much, maybe when he was younger it might have been competitive but Bradley clearly won the fight.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Timmy won 7/8 rounds


----------



## J.R. (May 21, 2013)

I'll have to watch it again and score without prejudice and influence. I stand by what I said as far as the commentating goes. HBO was all over Bradley's nuts and that's why I ultimately think there wasn't as much controversy. That alone shifts the people's opinion greatly to one fighter's favor in close fights. I've witnessed it time and time and again. It's indisputable.

From what I remember from the action itself is that Bradley was certainly the busier of the two. He exemplified great ring generalship, no doubt. The fight was fought more or less on his terms. Having said that, in between all that Marquez was still able to land the more impact full blows consistently which at the end of the day is what I think holds more weight than anything else that goes on in the ring. Marquez was the one doing the damage in there. He was the one putting hurt on his opponent. Those big shots were enough to erase any of the light hurry up punches Bradley might've landed in those competitive rounds that I gave to JMM.


----------



## genaro g (Jun 7, 2013)

Bradleys jab definitely stood out to me, and he rolled with a lot of Marquez' shots. Bradleys work may have been flashier and he may have looked awkward at times but I think Bradley got the better of the exchanges and controlled the majority of the rds.


----------



## DBerry (Jun 11, 2013)

@Big feller , how did you see this fight?


----------



## Nyanners :sad5 (Jun 8, 2012)

Neither one did substantially more or enough for it to be a clear cut decision either way. They let it go to the judges without putting a stamp on it. I don't really get wrapped up in scoring or judging fights anymore, if you go 12 rounds without any significant dominance, then who gives a fuck which way some yokels swing it.


----------



## dftaylor (Jun 4, 2012)

I felt JMM took the win at the time. I've been a huge Bradley fan, but he was super fortunate against JMM.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

I had it for Bradley, pretty wide the first time actually but had him nicking all the close rounds.

I'll look at the rounds you had for Marquez and see where I disagree.
With the first round for example, if I split it up in 3 1 minute segments I thought Bradley barely won the first minute, had him winning the 2nd minute and also the 3rd minute.
I clearly disagree with you on the 1st round.

3rd round 1st minute: Bradley
2nd minute: Marquez
3rd: clear Marquez
Marquez

4th round:
1: clearly for Bradley
2:even
3: I don't see Marquez stealing anything especially after the 1st minute being so clear for Bradley (imo).
Bradley

5th
1:even
2:Marquez, clear for me
3:Marquez
Marquez, also Marquez did not wobble Bradley, looked like he misstepped. Even if Tim was wobbled it was a punch during the bell and I don't think those count especially when the ref was breaking them up.


6:
1:Bradley minute, Juan swinging wildly
2:Nod for Timbo
3idn't see Juan stealing anything honestly.
Tim

I clearly disagree with you on the 1st.
And for round 4 and 6, punches in the last minute don't count double and I can't give them to Juan

So I already have it 7-5 provided we have equal scorecards after 6.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

I had Bradley winning mate. I'll re-score later though, and we'll thrash it out.


----------



## uraharakisuke (May 16, 2013)

Thought Bradley won in a close but clear decision.


----------



## Powerpuncher (May 20, 2013)

Marquez won, he landed the cleaner more meaningful punches throughout. Bradley was mainly landing pitter pat type punches. If you had Bradley winning you rate pitter pat punches as highly as clean power punches, basically you're wrong.


----------



## jonnytightlips (Jun 14, 2012)

I had Bradley by a round. I remember scoring it while watching it. Very close fight but felt that Bradley did just about enough.


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

I'm reserving judgement for now, but I sure do like the thread topic. :good


I suspect this will be one of those cases where you really need to turn off the damn commentators, but somehow still hear the sound of punches, which of course is impossible.



FWIW, at the time I thought Bradley edged it, but I hated the WAY he edged it.


----------



## knockout artist (Jun 5, 2013)

I had it 115-113 to Bradley, but haven't seen it since. I don't think either guy 'beat' the other, it was close and you can score it based on what you prefer. 115-113 either way is fine with me


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

I had Bradley winning every single round. 

10-8.


----------



## dftaylor (Jun 4, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> I had Bradley winning every single round.
> 
> 10-8.


You make me sad.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

dyna said:


> I had it for Bradley, pretty wide the first time actually but had him nicking all the close rounds.
> 
> I'll look at the rounds you had for Marquez and see where I disagree.
> With the first round for example, if I split it up in 3 1 minute segments I thought Bradley barely won the first minute, had him winning the 2nd minute and also the 3rd minute.
> ...


You seem to have a weird system that doesn't comport with the norm. You don't count the individual minutes and award them on that. I think the 1st is one of JMM's clearer rounds, because he landed the better punches. Posturing and landing a few jabs doesn't negate that.

Thanks for taking the time to respond though.


----------



## shenmue (Aug 4, 2012)

From what i remember this is one of those 7-5 either way or 6-6 draw kind of fight, a few close rounds can go either way. I scored it 7-5 to Bradley but this needs a rewatch for sure. Good thread.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> You seem to have a weird system that doesn't comport with the norm. You don't count the individual minutes and award them on that. I think the 1st is one of JMM's clearer rounds, because he landed the better punches. Posturing and landing a few jabs doesn't negate that.
> Thanks for taking the time to respond though.


I use the individual minutes so I can keep track better what happened in the first third of the fight.
If for example Bradley won the first 2 minutes with a few pitter patter jabs but Marquez ended the fight with the only true effective punches I'd give it the round to him.


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

I will find time to watch it again. I took Marquez on that fight and i remember that he was down by 2 and was mentality prepared to lose my money.


----------



## The Sweet Science (Jun 5, 2013)

I had it 115-113 for Bradley. I will locate my live scorecard when I get time. I certainly didn't see any controversy in this fight. I don't think Bradley dominated the fight by any means, but I did score him the victor. For the record, I was rooting and rooting hard for Marquez. Though, I am always a fair judge no matter who I am rooting for.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

dyna said:


> I use the individual minutes so I can keep track better what happened in the first third of the fight.
> If for example Bradley won the first 2 minutes with a few pitter patter jabs but Marquez ended the fight with the only true effective punches I'd give it the round to him.


Yeah I don't see that system working out, for example if one minute of the fight is so dominate and meaningful compared to the other two minutes (if a fighter gets badly rocked, etc) then the other 2 minutes could get cancelled out


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The Sweet Science said:


> I had it 115-113 for Bradley. I will locate my live scorecard when I get time. I certainly didn't see any controversy in this fight. I don't think Bradley dominated the fight by any means, but I did score him the victor. For the record, I was rooting and rooting hard for Marquez. Though, I am always a fair judge no matter who I am rooting for.


Thanks, it would be cool to see your scorecard. Although I'm trying to get people to watch it with fresh eyes since I think people were influenced a lot by expectations.


----------



## The Sweet Science (Jun 5, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Thanks, it would be cool to see your scorecard. Although I'm trying to get people to watch it with fresh eyes since I think people were influenced a lot by expectations.


I know what you mean. I will gladly watch it again when I have time. That was my honest live assessment. I do not recall scoring the fight a second time.


----------



## igor_otsky (Jul 24, 2012)

of course, juan manuel marquez is undefeated in some guys. no blueprint.


----------



## KO-KING (Nov 9, 2014)

Marquez fan and had Money on him - had it 115-113 Bradley, JMM was just too slow, Bradley stole the rounds, it was clear for me..


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

To be honest the first time I watched it I think I had JMM winning by a round aswell, but the concensus opinion seemed to be so strongly in favour of Bradley having comfortably won at the time that I kind of just dropped it and thought maybe I was just entirely in the wrong. :lol:

Will rewatch and rescore at some point soon and add to this.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KO-KING said:


> Marquez fan and had Money on him - had it 115-113 Bradley, JMM was just too slow, Bradley stole the rounds, it was clear for me..


Rounds please.



Danny said:


> To be honest the first time I watched it I think I had JMM winning by a round aswell, but the concensus opinion seemed to be so strongly in favour of Bradley having comfortably won at the time that I kind of just dropped it and thought maybe I was just entirely in the wrong. :lol:
> 
> Will rewatch and rescore at some point soon and add to this.


This opinion seems more common a year later. It seems those who scored it for JMM just shrugged and stayed quiet for the most part while the pro-Bradley crowd was insistent. And now they're answering my call.


----------



## KO-KING (Nov 9, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Rounds please.
> 
> This opinion seems more common a year later. It seems those who scored it for JMM just shrugged and stayed quiet for the most part while the pro-Bradley was insistent. And now they're answering my call.


I dont remember, and i dont have the time to watch it again


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KO-KING said:


> I dont remember, and i dont have the time to watch it again


Alright then, farewell.


----------



## KO-KING (Nov 9, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Alright then, farewell.


What scorecard did you have it?, since you JMM winning - what 7 rounds did you give him


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KO-KING said:


> What scorecard did you have it?, since you JMM winning - what 7 rounds did you give him


It's in the OP my friend. Most of them were won close, but a close round doesn't mean it can be scored any which way. Winning is winning, by an inch or a mile. Sometimes a few punches made the difference, but they were the difference.


----------



## KO-KING (Nov 9, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> It's in the OP my friend. Most of them were won close, but a close round doesn't mean it can be scored any which way. Winning is winning, by an inch or a mile. Sometimes a few punches made the difference, but they were the difference.


The closest i can see the fight is a draw, I just see bradley outboxing JMM, and the reason Sky were so biased, was they were trying to build Bradley as the superstar after he 'beat' Pac, but no one liked bradley, so they left it


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KO-KING said:


> The closest i can see the fight is a draw, I just see bradley outboxing JMM, and the reason Sky were so biased, was they were trying to build Bradley as the superstar after he 'beat' Pac, but no one liked bradley, so they left it


Bradley impressed everyone with his movement but he gave the appearance of "outboxing" JMM by throwing jabs that largely felt short and posturing. JMM landed the more effective punches, which is the objective. But yeah I can totally see that angle with sky. :rofl @ no one liked him, kinda true.


----------



## KO-KING (Nov 9, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Bradley impressed everyone with his movement but he gave the appearance of "outboxing" JMM by throwing jabs that largely felt short and posturing. JMM landed the more effective punches, which is the objective. But yeah I can totally see that angle with sky. :rofl @ no one liked him, kinda true.


they made it seem like it was 118-110/117-111 masterclass


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

KO-KING said:


> they made it seem like it was 118-110/117-111 masterclass


Yeah. JMM would hit him and they'd compliment Bradley.


----------



## Drunkenboat (Jul 29, 2012)

Prior warning of bias: I like Timmeh and think Marquez is a whiny bitch who drinks his own piss and eats steroids.

jmm - tb

9 - 10
9 - 10
9 - 10
10 - 9
10 - 9
10 - 9
9 - 10
9 - 10
10 - 9
9 - 10
10 - 9
9 - 10

113 - 115 to Bradley. Definitely could be a draw or one round to Marquez ... like Pac/Maquez 3.


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

Just finished watching the fight again and my score was identical to the first time I saw it(although I don't remember my original rd by rd scoring); 115-113 Marquez.

Marquez: 1,3,5,8,9,11,12
Bradley: 2,4,6,7,10

Most of the rounds were extremely close and there was definitely not "schooling" by either man.


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

Watched it again:

Round 1: Marquez 10-9


Quiet round really, lots of tentative shots thrown nothing landing much, Marquez probably with the slightly better shots with the few short leftt-hands so I edged towards him because of that and because he took up the centre of the ring and I think established his gameplan early, looking more dangerous looking to counter Bradley on the way in than Bradley did controlling with is bursts in and out.


Round 2: Bradley 10-9


Clear round for me, Bradley wiith the best shot of the fight so far with the overhand right, good left hook to the body in an exchange that backed Marquez up too, and a good counter-left. Established his jab a lot more and more aggressive than the opening round.


Round 3: Marquez 10-9


I edged towards JMM here, again very close round, principally because I thought he looked dangerous with his counter-punching even though a lot missed, Bradley looked like he struggled to find a home for his jab and box with the same sort of fluidity he did in the last round.


Round 4: Bradley10-9


Bradley started well with a couple of good shots, Marquez landing a couple late, edge towards Bradley because of activity with the jab but he's allowing Marquez to counter it too much, though nothing much landing.


Round 5: Bradley 10-9


Thought a clear enough Bradley round, Marquez right hand in the exchange a bit more effective but Bradley landed some good shots thereafter, Marquez missing a lot, Bradley with a couple of good snapping jabs and bringing more aggression staying on Marquez after the exchange a bit more.


Round 6: Bradley 10-9


Close round, edge towards Bradley probably slightly better shots and again, some decent counters that might have been missing in real-time and again more activity, busier with the jab looking to sit down on right hands more.


Round 7: Bradley 10-9


Bradley for me, not really any clear shots landed this round, more a jabbing battle with Bradley won, heavier, busier jab, landed with more snap, countered counter-jabs well at times too, in and out quite well defensively adept as Marquez struggled to find the right-hand over the jab.


Round 8: Bradley 10-9


Bradley just busier, got caught with a left hand early and turned aggressive, pressing Marquez with the jab, superb 1-2 shortly after the best shots of the round, boxed aggressively again and looked comfortable setting a higher pace.


Round 9: Marquez 10-9


JMM much, much sharper with right hand, busier and more aggressive, Bradley not able to box behind the jab the way he wanted to. Clear Marquez round.


Round 10: Bradley 10-9


Started with a good in-out burst right hand early on, got caught with a good shot by Marquez and immediately pressed him back and landed a better one, thought he edged this on slightly better shots and looked sharp on the counter.


Round 11: Marquez 10-9


Agree with Kellerman thought Bradley looked a bit more tired moving a lot, got caught a bit more trying to burst in and out than usual, edge towards Marquez in terms of cleaner shots.


Round 12: Bradley 10-9


Think the last shot did largely change it with Marquez nearly down, going for it and Bradley obliging by exchanging with him and clearly getting the better of the exchange, Marquez landed probably the better shots up to that point though.


Final score: 116-112 Bradley

Meh, maybe not. Close fight though, nearly hard to score, Marquez looking at times to be landing the more effective punches, but simply missed so much badly that he was made to look quite bad by Bradley, who despite missing a lot of jabs did at times simply outwork and outland Marquez, and looked good despite again a lot of shots not landing and a lot of posturing.

Horrible fight to score, Lederman talking absolute shit. Hardly any shots really landed, a lot of Bradley leading and missing, Marquez countering and missing and Bradley trying to counter the counter and missing. Barely any clear rounds so wouldn't really argue it either way.


----------



## saul_ir34 (Jun 8, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Yeah. JMM would hit him and they'd compliment Bradley.


This happened consistently in the 3rd Pac fight too. I remember thinking to myself. Are they really this biased?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Drunkenboat said:


> Prior warning of bias: I like Timmeh and think Marquez is a whiny bitch who drinks his own piss and eats steroids.
> 
> jmm - tb
> 
> ...


Why did you give Bradley the 1st round? I thought that was a pretty clear JMM round. He landed the best shots, Bradley landed just a few.

(I don't see how Pac-JMM 3 could be scored to Pacquiao but that's another thread.)


----------



## gander tasco (Jun 23, 2013)

High quality here:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1a8k1d_timothy-bradley-vs-juan-manuel-marquez-12-10-2013-hd_sport

I had Bradley winning the first time , rewatched it - thought it was closer but can't remember who I ended up going for .


----------



## Drew101 (Jun 30, 2012)

Found my score for the fight: 116-113 Bradley. Might be closer upon a second viewing.


----------



## El-Terrible (Jun 5, 2013)

I had it 115-113 to Bradley, and though it was a close fight, I didn't at the time think the rounds were too tough to call. Though I watched it at the time so will definitely take a fresh look again now


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

I still haven't had time to serious score it RbR, (Sorry, Bogo !) but watching it while doing other stuff, I'm reminded of why I thought Bradley edged it the first time:


First, A lot of Bradley's punches were NOT just "pity pat" like many suggest. Some were, but he also did a lot of fast in-out where he'd land one solid punch. You can't claim Juan landed the more meaningful punches unless his punches were actually HURTING Bradley, and they were not. 

Bradley's accuracy was also surprisingly good. I'm actually more impressed with Bradley after a second viewing.


Second: Bradley just plain made Marquez look old. The great JMM actually appeared slightly frustrated and clueless. He'd have had to to win by a LARGE points spread for me to give him that fight.


----------



## El-Terrible (Jun 5, 2013)

Cableaddict said:


> I still haven't had time to serious score it RbR, (Sorry, Bogo !) but watching it while doing other stuff, I'm reminded of why I thought Bradley edged it the first time:
> 
> First, A lot of Bradley's punches were NOT just "pity pat" like many suggest. Some were, but he also did a lot of fast in-out where he'd land one solid punch. You can't claim Juan landed the more meaningful punches unless his punches were actually HURTING Bradley, and they were not.
> 
> ...


Though "made him look old" was a bit harsh, I remember watching it and thinking how it showed Marquez struggles if an opponent fights defensively with movement, a good jab and good reach. Marquez is uncomfortable coming forward, this really showed in round 12 when he threw caution to the wind and almost went down. At least that's exactly how I saw it at the time - he definitely started looking frustrated after about round 7/8, I think he suspected he was behind


----------



## Setanta (May 24, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Hello boys, feel free to chime in after a second watch if you like.


I scored it for JMM the night it happened.

A draw would not have been unreasonable either.

I didn't term it a robbery as it was close.

I mentioned on the other forum that I felt he was 0-3 in his last three fights after JMM.

As of now, he's very arguably winless in five.


----------



## elterrible (May 20, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> It's boring up in here, let's get controversial.


First time I seen Bradley used as a cure for boredom.


----------



## igor_otsky (Jul 24, 2012)

did someone watched it in slomo?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Setanta said:


> I scored it for JMM the night it happened.
> 
> A draw would not have been unreasonable either.
> 
> ...


My thoughts exactly Setanta.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Cableaddict said:


> I still haven't had time to serious score it RbR, (Sorry, Bogo !) but watching it while doing other stuff, I'm reminded of why I thought Bradley edged it the first time:
> 
> First, A lot of Bradley's punches were NOT just "pity pat" like many suggest. Some were, but he also did a lot of fast in-out where he'd land one solid punch. You can't claim Juan landed the more meaningful punches unless his punches were actually HURTING Bradley, and they were not.
> 
> ...


How come Bradley can win a round on landing a solid punch, but why does JMM have to straight up HURT Bradley?

I disagree about Bradley's accuracy. Both missed a lot of shots. I'd say Bradley landed less than half of his jabs.

Making another fighter "look old" is not a scoring criteria. This is where expectations come in and distort fair scoring. Just as when Lampley asked one of the Pacquiao-Bradley 1 judges why he scored the fight for Tim; "Pacquiao just didn't look as fast and explosive as he had in the past". Irrelevant as to who won rounds.

Bradley _looked cool_, so just watching it casually, he looks in control. But round by round, I don't see him winning 7. This is what I mean by smoke and mirrors. Posing and moving around seemed to be enough. It shouldn't be.


----------



## Setanta (May 24, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Setanta said:
> 
> 
> > I scored it for JMM the night it happened.
> ...


That said, i thought Bradley fought a helluva a fight in all five outings.
I would opine that even if I saw him as failing to win any of the five, these would have to rank as maybe the best ever five consecutive losing/drawing efforts at this level of competition.

But Pac definitely beat him twice, and I felt JMM and Provodnikov did as well.

The Chaves bout was less clear.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Setanta said:


> That said, i thought Bradley fought a helluva a fight in all five outings.
> I would opine that even if I saw him as failing to win any of the five, these would have to rank as maybe the best ever five consecutive losing/drawing efforts at this level of competition.
> 
> But Pac definitely beat him twice, and I felt JMM and Provodnikov did as well.
> ...


Bradley definitely came prepared and defensively made some impressive moves in making JMM miss and picking some key moments to throw leads. I thought the fight would be competitive, not to that extent, but I knew Bradley wasn't going to come in Provodnikov style.

Pac beat him twice, I felt Provodnikov beat him it too and would have had the forgiven knockdown been called early.

I wasn't scoring the Chaves fight, I thought he was landing the better punches but it was a competitive fight.

This is why I started getting bothered, some people were talking about Bradley like he was the next big thing somehow. The guy hasn't won a fight clearly or without controversy since Casamayor ffs. I like him but some people gave him the benefit of the doubt at every turn.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

ElKiller said:


> Just finished watching the fight again and my score was identical to the first time I saw it(although I don't remember my original rd by rd scoring); 115-113 Marquez.
> 
> Marquez: 1,3,5,8,9,11,12
> Bradley: 2,4,6,7,10
> ...


Interesting, you and I gave it to JMM but have 8, 11, 4, 6, 7 the opposite way.










Hoyle is the least consistent, giving Bradley the first and JMM the 12th.

"In 7 of the 12 rounds, Marquez won on at least 2 of the 3 Judge's scorecards. In other words, under the consensus scoring system, Marquez would have won 115-113."


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Danny said:


> Watched it again:
> 
> Round 1: Marquez 10-9
> 
> ...


Thanks for recounting Danny. I have a question; you mention "activity" and "being busier" quite a lot. Do you award value or give an edge to someone who throws a lot even if they don't land?

Rounds 5,6,7 are the ones we disagree with the most. Those are some of the closest ones, but also the ones where in my opinion Marquez landed the cleaner punches that set him apart.


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Making another fighter "look old" is not a scoring criteria. This is where expectations come in and distort fair scoring. Just as when Lampley asked one of the Pacquiao-Bradley 1 judges why he scored the fight for Tim; "Pacquiao just didn't look as fast and explosive as he had in the past". Irrelevant as to who won rounds.
> 
> Bradley _looked cool_, so just watching it casually, he looks in control. But round by round, I don't see him winning 7. This is what I mean by smoke and mirrors. Posing and moving around seemed to be enough. It shouldn't be.


Hmmm. You may have a point. But Bradley making Juan look frustrated points to his ring generalship, and that DOES count. Bradley had the smarter game plan in that fight. Juan wasn't controlling ANYTHING.

I have to think about this for a while .......


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

J.R. said:


> I'll have to watch it again and score without prejudice and influence. I stand by what I said as far as the commentating goes. HBO was all over Bradley's nuts and that's why I ultimately think there wasn't as much controversy. That alone shifts the people's opinion greatly to one fighter's favor in close fights. I've witnessed it time and time and again. It's indisputable.
> 
> From what I remember from the action itself is that Bradley was certainly the busier of the two. He exemplified great ring generalship, no doubt. The fight was fought more or less on his terms. Having said that, in between all that Marquez was still able to land the more impact full blows consistently which at the end of the day is what I think holds more weight than anything else that goes on in the ring. Marquez was the one doing the damage in there. He was the one putting hurt on his opponent. Those big shots were enough to erase any of the light hurry up punches Bradley might've landed in those competitive rounds that I gave to JMM.


Being busy and posing in several rounds as if he was in control lured the judges. Its unfortunate that what are supposed to be proffesional judges 
are influenced like that.
Bradley was busier, but at the end of the day punchstat showed the total connects to be virtually identical.
When you take into account that the same punchstats had Marquez landing a significant more power shots and that he landed at a much better 
connect %, that lends credence for anyone to have Marquez winning.

I had Marquez edging it at the end, but its one of those fights that could be scored in th realm of 7-5 either way.

You're right Tazo, Bradley got the decision with a smoke and mirrors performance much like Ray Leonard played to the crowd in his 
perfomance vs Marvin Hagler.
The consistently more effective shots were landed by Marquez just as the consistently more effective shots were landed by Hagler.

Dont have a huge problem with the decision. I do have a problem with people viewing the fight as dominant by Bradley.
I think thats plain wrong, but then again, alot of fans were butthurt over KTFO6, and all they wished for is for someone to put 
Marquez in his place even is he had to do it with smoke and mirrors.


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Thanks for recounting Danny. I have a question; you mention "activity" and "being busier" quite a lot. Do you award value or give an edge to someone who throws a lot even if they don't land?
> 
> Rounds 5,6,7 are the ones we disagree with the most. Those are some of the closest ones, but also the ones where in my opinion Marquez landed the cleaner punches that set him apart.


I try not to much, I'm always very wary that I may be getting drawn in to simply who's the more active fighter and I try not to do that as often it's ineffective, however in these rounds I liked Timmy's aggression, he stepped up and come forward a bit more, tried to sit down with more power on the right hand, was busy and probing with the jab. For me there were simply too few clean shots in these rounds to score based on that, I didn't really feel one man had the advantage one way or the other, so I looked more towards other criteria and I felt like Bradley was the better ring general around this part, stepping up with a more aggressive probing style in these rounds I thought he looked comfortable and effective, probing and always looking the more dangerous of the two whilst Marquez struggled to find a home for the right hand and was kept largely occupied.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Danny said:


> I try not to much, I'm always very wary that I may be getting drawn in to simply who's the more active fighter and I try not to do that as often it's ineffective, however in these rounds *I liked Timmy's aggression, he stepped up and come forward a bit more, tried to sit down with more power on the right hand, was busy and probing with the jab.* For me there were simply too few clean shots in these rounds to score based on that, I didn't really feel one man had the advantage one way or the other, so I looked more towards other criteria and I felt like Bradley was the better ring general around this part, stepping up with a more aggressive probing style in these rounds I thought he looked comfortable and effective, probing and always looking the more dangerous of the two whilst Marquez struggled to find a home for the right hand and was kept largely occupied.


See, this right there is where I think the difference lies and what I take issue with. Probing? Coming forward? These things aren't worthy of points _on their own._ Aggression is only valuable if it's effective, and it's only effective if it leads to landed punches. Probing is its own reward, if it leads to landed shots. Or him _trying_ to sit down on the right hand. It seems people are looking at process more than they are outcome. Again, this is what I mean by smoke and mirrors. Ring generalship means actual control of the ring, but looking at the fight neither man had a distinct advantage there. Nor in defense since both missed plenty. The deciding factor has to be clean punches. And in the mid-rounds, JMM landed a few more each round. Timmy fell short there. You shouldn't get points for just trying and it's not a posing contest.


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Rounds please.
> 
> This opinion seems more common a year later. It seems those who scored it for JMM just shrugged and stayed quiet for the most part while the pro-Bradley crowd was insistent. And now they're answering my call.


Yep! I think most members in forums like this are afraid to voice their true opinion if it does'nt coincide with the majority.
For some reason, alot of people came out posting that Bradley won it clear, and a good chunk of those thought Bradley schooled Marquez which 
I find hillariousl
As a result, posters who are not quite sure of themselves just drop it.

Great thread Tazo, I'n finding out for the first time now that there's a great many posters that viewed it dfferent than the misguided general consensus
that puts so much emphasis and relies on commentary to tell them who's winning a round.
Keep up the good work!


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> See, this right there is where I think the difference lies and what I take issue with. Probing? Coming forward? These things aren't worthy of points _on their own._ Aggression is only valuable if it's effective, and it's only effective if it leads to landed punches. Probing is its own reward, if it leads to landed shots. Or him _trying_ to sit down on the right hand. It seems people are looking at process more than they are outcome. Again, this is what I mean by smoke and mirrors. Ring generalship means actual control of the ring, but looking at the fight neither man had a distinct advantage there. Nor in defense since both missed plenty. The deciding factor has to be clean punches. And in the mid-rounds, JMM landed a few more each round. Timmy fell short there. You shouldn't get points for just trying and it's not a posing contest.


Okay let me put it this way, I thought Marquez was very cautious in these parts and didn't exactly open up much, when a fighter doesn't do this it's difficult to score a round for him, if fighter A lands one half-decent punch at the start of the rounds and then spends the next 3 minutes running whilst fighter B tries to pin him down and is letting his hands go, trying to be aggressive and force a fight, does fighter A still win the round? For me it can't simply be a case of scoring purely on clean shots, that is of course the most important factor but there are others, which for me are where Bradley won.

This is the fight game after all, you're there to fight. As much as I can appreciate defensive boxers, sometimes if you aren't letting your hands go you simply can't expect to win rounds. Sometimes ineffective aggression is scored a lot, particularly by professional judges, however in reply the other guy has to be doing something effective himself to win the round, Marquez wasn't for me. A lot of these rounds I watched and felt like scoring them 10-10 I'll be honest because it was horribly close and nether guy was landing all that much the entire fight, however I dislike scoring even rounds and tried to find an edge one way or another.

Since I didn't feel either guy had an edge in clean shots landed (clearly you are set in the opinion that Marquez was landing the cleaner more effective shots, I felt like it was fairly close, baring in mind Bradley a lot looks like he's getting hit when he's rolling punches and missing them by centimetres, I felt this happened a lot), I felt like I had to look at other areas. I felt like Bradley's step-up in activity and aggression was effective because he looked to be setting things up, probing for openings off reads, setting the pace of the bout and generally forcing the fight in to a comfortable setting (whilst Marquez looked occupied by Bradley's work and uncomfortably unable to create openings for himself) for me these are all things that are going to count in his favour, because they come under ring generalmanship.


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

The cards were all over the place and there really was no consensus on a round by round basis so the individual results are understandable; what bothers me is the inconsistency in the scoring.

12th rd, for example. IMO that was a clear Marquez round, He out-jabbed, out power-punched and basically outworked Bradley and yet some people scored it for TB based on the one punch he landed towards the end of the round, which, although gif worthy, was not really that effective but it obviously fooled a lot of people.By the way, some of the same people that discounted Marquez's overall power-punch superiority throughout the fight managed to give Bradley that round on the basis of that one shot.

Another example is some people saying they gave the fight to Bradley because Marquez missed too many punches but he actually had the higher connect percentage.:conf


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Danny said:


> Okay let me put it this way, I thought Marquez was very cautious in these parts and didn't exactly open up much, *when a fighter doesn't do this it's difficult to score a round for him, if fighter A lands one half-decent punch at the start of the rounds and then spends the next 3 minutes running whilst fighter B tries to pin him down and is letting his hands go, trying to be aggressive and force a fight, does fighter A still win the round?* For me it can't simply be a case of scoring purely on clean shots, that is of course the most important factor but there are others, which for me are where Bradley won.


This is what I don't agree with. If you hit a fighter and make them miss the rest of their punches, yes, you win the round. "Opening up" is not part of the criteria. Nor is inefficient aggression, which is what you're highlighting here by "trying to be aggressive and forcing a fight" but failing. That's not an element. You shouldn't get rewarded for just trying.



Danny said:


> This is the fight game after all, you're there to fight. As much as I can appreciate defensive boxers, sometimes if you aren't letting your hands go you simply can't expect to win rounds. Sometimes ineffective aggression is scored a lot, particularly by professional judges, however in reply the other guy has to be doing something effective himself to win the round, Marquez wasn't for me. A lot of these rounds I watched and felt like scoring them 10-10 I'll be honest because it was horribly close and nether guy was landing all that much the entire fight, however I dislike scoring even rounds and tried to find an edge one way or another.


You should expect to win rounds if you land punches. Landing 2 punches will always mean more than missing 20. Letting your hands go only counts if you find a target. In the middle rounds, Bradley missed a lot, and JMM landed a few more effective punches. The other critieria were not dominant one way or the other; both were made to miss plenty, and Bradley wasn't controlling the ring as well as Lara against Canelo for example. The two were never too far apart.

Ironically, what you just wrote here would be a justification for JMM winning rounds anyway. He was the one trying to make the fight while Bradley spend a lot of time just side-stepping a whole lot and stepping back without putting much forth himself.



Danny said:


> Since I didn't feel either guy had an edge in clean shots landed (clearly you are set in the opinion that Marquez was landing the cleaner more effective shots, I felt like it was fairly close, baring in mind Bradley a lot looks like he's getting hit when he's rolling punches and missing them by centimetres, I felt this happened a lot), I felt like I had to look at other areas. I felt like Bradley's step-up in activity and aggression was effective because he looked to be setting things up, probing for openings off reads, setting the pace of the bout and generally forcing the fight in to a comfortable setting (whilst Marquez looked occupied by Bradley's work and uncomfortably unable to create openings for himself) for me these are all things that are going to count in his favour, because they come under ring generalmanship.


I think in individual rounds, it was the case in a majority yeah, so if we differ there then we disagree. What it would take is a highlight video of the middle rounds for every thrown or landed punch (if only I had the time). I will give you though that Bradley did score on ring generalship by making JMM guess and disrupting his pace. But often times he was defending at the expense of his own offense, allowed JMM to land more punches. The 4 criteria ultimately boil down to punches. How can aggression be effective if you miss? How can defense count if you're outlanded? How can ring generalship be superior if you're outlanded? That's the logical conclusion IMO.


----------



## MEXAMELAC (Apr 14, 2014)

Ballsy move by Bogo









I'd have to watch it again.


----------



## El-Terrible (Jun 5, 2013)

ElKiller said:


> The cards were all over the place and there really was no consensus on a round by round basis so the individual results are understandable; what bothers me is the inconsistency in the scoring.
> 
> 12th rd, for example. IMO that was a clear Marquez round, He out-jabbed, out power-punched and basically outworked Bradley and yet some people scored it for TB based on the one punch he landed towards the end of the round, which, although gif worthy, was not really that effective but it obviously fooled a lot of people.By the way, some of the same people that discounted Marquez's overall power-punch superiority throughout the fight managed to give Bradley that round on the basis of that one shot.
> 
> Another example is some people saying they gave the fight to Bradley because Marquez missed too many punches but he actually had the higher connect percentage.:conf


Point was that in the 12th round, he went into a big exchange and came out of it nearly getting knocked down. He went into that looking a bit desperate, like he knew he was behind. Now when that happens you get into a very subjective area about how does that big moment weigh up against the rest of the round. This is a big moment where one man clearly came out on top - how do you mentally put that up against a couple of smaller exchanges earlier in the round that Marquez may have won

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying the 12th round becomes very subjective because of that big moment. It's the beauty and head shaking nature of the judging system so it may be hard to win over an argument with someone who thinks Bradley won that round. Sure, you may go over the round again on TV, but that has no impact as to how you score it at that moment in time


----------



## AnthonyW (Jun 2, 2012)

Thought it was close and clear to Bradley when I first watched it. I'll check it out when I get time and see what's what. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

AnthonyW said:


> Thought it was close and clear to Bradley when I first watched it. I'll check it out when I get time and see what's what.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks man, look forward to it.


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

El-Terrible said:


> Point was that in the 12th round, he went into a big exchange and came out of it nearly getting knocked down. He went into that looking a bit desperate, like he knew he was behind. Now when that happens you get into a very subjective area about how does that big moment weigh up against the rest of the round. This is a big moment where one man clearly came out on top - how do you mentally put that up against a couple of smaller exchanges earlier in the round that Marquez may have won
> 
> I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just saying the 12th round becomes very subjective because of that big moment. It's the beauty and head shaking nature of the judging system so it may be hard to win over an argument with someone who thinks Bradley won that round. Sure, you may go over the round again on TV, but that has no impact as to how you score it at that moment in time


That "big moment" you talk about is an example of Tazp's assertion that Bradley won through smoke and mirrors.
A fighter clearly winning the first 2:30 of a round and then having it all erased because of one punch that knocks a fighter off balance, and in the example I posted earlier, Ray Leonard conning everyone by admittedly planing to flurry at the 10 second mark of every round.

You're saying that such events influence scoring. I say you're right, they do, but if you're proffessional as judges should be, they should'nt.
Each round as a whole should be scored, and in the case of Marquez-Bradley 12th round, I dont think Marquez losing his balance while getting hit with a left hook in the midst of closing a round by whaling at eachother, offsets Marquez' work in the round prior to that.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Personally the 12th round is hard for me to score as well. JMM did the better work up to that point but it was a good shot though. In terms of smoke and mirrors I was referring more towards posing, falling short with a jab, looking cool, side-stepping, and creating the illusion he's "winning" while getting outlanded.


----------



## JDK (Jun 3, 2013)

Bradley is a very beatable champion and JMM had the tools to beat him going into the fight, but he did not execute enough to press Bradley into opening up more than was necessary. Gave it to Bradley in a close fight. Marquez is no come forward fighter, but he does know how to pressure and cause fighters to retaliate. He didn't do enough of it.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

JDK said:


> Bradley is a very beatable champion and JMM had the tools to beat him going into the fight, but he did not execute enough to press Bradley into opening up more than was necessary. Gave it to Bradley in a close fight. Marquez is no come forward fighter, but he does know how to pressure and cause fighters to retaliate. He didn't do enough of it.


Rounds?


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Marquez won 7 rounds on at least 2/3 scorecards.


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Compubox had Bradley winning

You can't argue with Compubox










Prime Compubox is always right

:tim:grin:grin


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

knowimuch said:


> Compubox had Bradley winning
> 
> You can't argue with Compubox
> 
> ...


Punchstat had Bradley outlanding Marquez by only 15 total punches.
Marquez landed 30 more power punches than Bradley.

Taking into account that even those at ringside who scored for Bradley were of the opinion that Marquez shots were harder and more telling, I think he has every right to claim victory.

If you want to go by punchstat and take into account that this was a proffesional and not an amatuer boxing match, I think that the punchstats leans toward the side Marquez being the winner.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

knowimuch said:


> Compubox had Bradley winning
> 
> You can't argue with Compubox
> 
> ...


Prime?! Compubox is shot. Hell, it might have been born shot.


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

Compubox is the statistical equivalent to James Toney's speech patterns.


----------



## ElKiller (Jun 14, 2014)

The Dinamita Twist.


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

ElKiller said:


> The Dinamita Twist.


The lady at the ring apron with the pen and paper. I just realized thats Patricia Joyce Jarman. I'm just finding out she's black. 
I dont think its a coincidence that she was the judge that had the widest score. A 116-112 victory for her fellow black brother 
Tim Bradley.

Having said that, I cant believe Marquez' team allowed the choice of a black judge without having a Latino judge in the mix.

All three American judges and a black judge in the mix to boot! 
Its unfortunate, but I do think race plays a role in how judges can view and judge a close fight.
Las Vegas has a problem with judges, they dont have a single Latino in their pool of judges.

Marquez' team dropped the ball, if I was leading that team, I'd have never allowed Patricia Jarman to judge that fight.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

divac. said:


> The lady at the ring apron with the pen and paper. I just realized thats Patricia Joyce Jarman. I'm just finding out she's black.
> I dont think its a coincidence that she was the judge that had the widest score. A 116-112 victory for her fellow black brother
> Tim Bradley.
> 
> ...


Meh, it's far too presumptive to accuse someone of auto-scoring for someone of their same ethnicity. It would be such a nightmare if fighters always made such a request on the judging panel. I think the judges, much like press row, were influenced by expectation and style over substance.


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Meh, it's far too presumptive to accuse someone of auto-scoring for someone of their same ethnicity. It would be such a nightmare if fighters always made such a request on the judging panel. I think the judges, much like press row, were influenced by expectation and style over substance.


We dont live in a perfect world my friend. As much as I would like to believe that race does'nt play into it when judging a fight, we both know that Bradley would object to an all Latino panel of judges or even one Mexican judge in the mix with two white judges.

Would you think it fair if there was a Pinoy judge alongside two white American judges in any of the Marquez-Pacquiao fights?
How about a Mexican judge alongside two white judges? You dont think CockRoach would have objected? Please!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

divac. said:


> We dont live in a perfect world my friend. As much as I would like to believe that race does'nt play into it when judging a fight, we both know that Bradley would object to an all Latino panel of judges or even one Mexican judge in the mix with two white judges.


Would he? Has this ever happened? Black judges are rare. Black fighters are judged by non-black judges all the time.



divac. said:


> Would you think it fair if there was a Pinoy judge alongside two white American judges in any of the Marquez-Pacquiao fights?
> How about a Mexican judge alongside two white judges? You dont think CockRoach would have objected? Please!


That's different because foreign nationalities come into the mix, as well as the fact that the US is a hub for major fights generally; it's always a mix of fighters from all sorts of places that the judges have to look at.

I'm just not going to sit here and look at a black woman and assume she's scoring for Bradley because he's black. Race matters in today's society but it doesn't mean I'm going to assume people are that biased and presume that. That's bigoted in itself IMO.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

I dreamt that Floyd Mayweather knocked out Mike Tyson.
Crazy shit


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Tell you what dude, you earned a re-watch from me. I was too drunk to score it and being a JMM fanboy i'm in your catchment for this thread. I'll hit it this weekend.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

(just to point out that EVERYONE'S jab "misses more than hits." pet hate.)


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

Bogotazo said:


> Would he? Has this ever happened? Black judges are rare. Black fighters are judged by non-black judges all the time.
> 
> That's different because foreign nationalities come into the mix, as well as the fact that the US is a hub for major fights generally; it's always a mix of fighters from all sorts of places that the judges have to look at.
> 
> I'm just not going to sit here and look at a black woman and assume she's scoring for Bradley because he's black. Race matters in today's society but it doesn't mean I'm going to assume people are that biased and presume that. That's bigoted in itself IMO.


Call me a bigot then, cause you're not going to tell me there is'nt a greater probablity of a black judge scoring for the black fighter in a close round, just as there would be a greater probablity of a Mexican judge scoring a close round to the Mexican fighter.

I'm talking probablities here Tazo, that does'nt mean there are'nt judges that would score it down the line fair regardless.
But for me, I dont think it was a coincidence that Patricia Jarmin was the judge that had it the fight scored by the widest margin and in favor of Bradley.

If Partricia Jarmin would have score the fight a draw, I'd have applauded her, but I would have still been against her having been appointed to judge Marquez-Bradley.

To prevent a conflict of interest in a fight and with the judging pool they have in Las Vegas, Jarmin can judge fights between fighters of the same nationality.
She can judge fights between a white fighter and a black fighter since more than likely the other two judges would be white Americans.
But I'd have an issue with her judging a fight between a black fighter and someone of another nationality other than white.

........and I dont feel I'm being a bigot since I'd feel it would be unfair to Bradley if instead of Patricia Jarmin there would have been a Mexican judge along with two 
white judges judging his fight with Marquez.

This is nothing new in boxing Tazo, theres been plenty of fighters who've complained about a judge panel soley on the race of the judges.


----------



## El-Terrible (Jun 5, 2013)

divac. said:


> That "big moment" you talk about is an example of Tazp's assertion that Bradley won through smoke and mirrors.
> A fighter clearly winning the first 2:30 of a round and then having it all erased because of one punch that knocks a fighter off balance, and in the example I posted earlier, Ray Leonard conning everyone by admittedly planing to flurry at the 10 second mark of every round.
> 
> You're saying that such events influence scoring. I say you're right, they do, but if you're proffessional as judges should be, they should'nt.
> Each round as a whole should be scored, and in the case of Marquez-Bradley 12th round, I dont think Marquez losing his balance while getting hit with a left hook in the midst of closing a round by whaling at eachother, offsets Marquez' work in the round prior to that.


I agree with you about professionalism in judges - I definitely have to see the fight again though and want to see just how much the 12th round belonged to Marquez at that point. I would say that almost going down will certainly offset SOME of the good work you have done, it's not like that moment counts for nothing. The question is how much good work was done - will definitely watch it this weekend


----------



## knowimuch (May 9, 2014)

Cableaddict said:


> Compubox is the statistical equivalent to James Toney's speech patterns.


:rofl



divac. said:


> Punchstat had Bradley outlanding Marquez by only 15 total punches.
> Marquez landed 30 more power punches than Bradley.
> 
> Taking into account that even those at ringside who scored for Bradley were of the opinion that Marquez shots were harder and more telling, I think he has every right to claim victory.
> ...


I know dude, was just joking. will watch the fight again, had it for Bradley the first time but im not the best scorer of close fights tbh and i have certain bias for fighters i like more. i don't dislike marquez, just like bradley more



Bogotazo said:


> Prime?! Compubox is shot. Hell, it might have been born shot.


Compubox is prime, it's the driving force behind the western economy. all decisions are made by it

on a serious note: will watch the fight again and see if marquez deserved it or not


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Rewatched:

R1 - Marquez. Marquez just edges it with the upper cut. Jabs were traded and the meaningful left from Marquez was countered. Close round.

R2 - Bradley lands left to the body right to the head. Nice right hook from Bradley. Bradley lands a good body shot, Marquez counters. Another hook from Bradley. Bradley lands a good right just before the bell. Bradley's round clearly.

R3 - Bradley lands a left hook to the body. Right from Marquez. Bradley round but close. 

R4 - Good reffing. Too much vaseline on M's face. Another very close round. Marquez could have just edged it by being more in control during the 2nd half of the round. Nothing meaningful landed but counters were more impressive from Marquez. Bradley controlled the 1st half of the round better but Marquez' half was probably better but not by much.

R5 - Marquez uncleanly lands a couple of not very meaningful hooks. Bradley lands a good left hook. Marquez misses a counter. Bradley does better in an exchange. Marquez showboats and pays the price. Not a meaningful punch landed but a punch landed nonetheless because of Marquez' lapse of focus/or built up frustration? Bradley round.

R6 - Up until this point the start of each round had been very slow. in R6 Bradley comes out a lot more active. Marquez lands a nice counter left. Good body shot from Marquez. Good left hook from Bradley. Exchange near the end that Marquez wins. Marquez round.

R7 - Round starts quickly again. Both fighters are starting to pull the action earlier into the rounnd than before. A few jabs landed equally. Close round. Bradley marginally lands the meaningful shots but nothing meaningful was really landed. Bradley round.

R8 - Marquez lands a good punch in the opening seconds. Bradley lands a good right hook. Marquez lands a right. Marquez wins an exchange. Bradley lands a couple of not meaningful hooks. Very very close round. Marquez round just.

R9 - Bradley lands nice hook 15 seconds in. Bradley making Marquez miss a couple of times and lands light counters. Bradley lands a good right to the head. No pop on Marquez' counters. Marquez lands a nice left. Bradley round.

R10 - Right and left combo from Bradley. Big right form Bradley lands. Bradley round.

R11 - Marquez seems more in controlthis round but nothing meaningful is thrown by either fighter. Marquez just edging it. Marquez round.

R12 - Bradley in and out. Marquez lands. Bradley lands jabs. Bradley showboating. A couple of big rights from Bradley. Marquez almost down.

1 M (close)
2 B (clear)
3 B (close)
4 M (close)
5 B (clear)
6 M (clear)
7 B (close)
8 M (close)
9 B (clear)
10 B (clear)
11 M (close)
12 B (clear)

Bradley wins: 115-113

6 close rounds (1,3,4,7,8,11)
6 clear rounds (Bradley: 2,5,9,10,12) (Marquez: 6)

Definitely closer than when I first scored it but Bradley definitely won the fight.


----------



## AnthonyW (Jun 2, 2012)

Forgive the random scribbles, couldn't be bothered going in to too much detail as I was writing as I watched. Plus I'm knackered. Surprised by my scoring, but it happens. I was trying not to just give Marquez rounds because I wanted my scorecard to change, I thought he won, basically :conf 

1. M - cleaner work, parrying blocking shots that look to be landing
2. B - controlling the pace much better than the first, making it hard for Marquez to time, as the round goes on it evens up, Bradley having the last word in an even round for me 
3. M - not much happens in the round, Marquez makes Bradley fall short with the jab time and time again, landing the few effective punches of the round, clear round 
4. B - close round for me, nothing really standout, both fighting for control, Bradley just edging it out on the slightly cleaner work 
5. M - when I first watched this round live I thought it was a clear round to Bradley. Having watched it again, I've changed it to a close but clear round for Marquez. Most of Bradley's work is out of range, being blocked, slipped or countered with more effective work. The bias from Sky sports is unreal in this round! Bradley's 'eye catching' but not really effective work is the reason for this!
6. Even - really close round, couldn't split them. Neither taking control or landing clean.
7. M - Again, no particularly clean work from either, but Marquez controlled the round with the jab. I thought Bradley's jab was more effective in this bout than what it was, Marquez is picking the majority of them off.
8. B - much better round from Bradley, following his work up with 2 and 3 phrases, still a close round 
9. M - even round coming up to a minute to go, still close last minute, but the cleaner, more effective work came from Marquez I felt. Marquez looked more in control of Bradley than vise versa in that last minute in terms of generalship.
10. B - difficult to score, Bradley looked more in control. Very good trade of punches in this round, Marquez landed some good, clean shots during it, but so did Bradley. From watching, Bradley seemed more in control of initiating the engagement, and ending it too. 
11. M - probably the clearest round for Marquez 
12. M - Marquez again for me, Bradley landed the most effective shot, Marquez landed the more effective shots. Forcing the pace. 

7-4-1 Marquez 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> This is what I don't agree with. If you hit a fighter and make them miss the rest of their punches, yes, you win the round. "Opening up" is not part of the criteria. Nor is inefficient aggression, which is what you're highlighting here by "trying to be aggressive and forcing a fight" but failing. That's not an element. You shouldn't get rewarded for just trying.
> 
> You should expect to win rounds if you land punches. Landing 2 punches will always mean more than missing 20. Letting your hands go only counts if you find a target. In the middle rounds, Bradley missed a lot, and JMM landed a few more effective punches. The other critieria were not dominant one way or the other; both were made to miss plenty, and Bradley wasn't controlling the ring as well as Lara against Canelo for example. The two were never too far apart.
> 
> ...


What this essentially comes down to is you think as a general premise that Marquez outlanded Bradley and/or landed the more effective shots, I don't. I think they were pretty much even as can be, therefore I looked for other reasons to score rounds and I think Bradley was the slightly more effective ring general and landed a few more shots overall as he was busier with the jab.

Don't think that I'm scoring rounds for Bradley based on activity and aggression having thought JMM landed the better punches, this simply wasn't the case for me. As I said, it will always come down for the most part to clean, effective punching, however this fight was completely devoid of that making it incredibly different to score on that criteria alone. Therefore in close rounds with few clean shots I looked at other criteria and felt Bradley bettered Marquezo in most of these departments in the majority of rounds.


----------



## OneTime (Nov 10, 2014)

Bradley beat him comfortably Marquez was clearly frustrated and lost in there. Timmy clowned his ass.


----------



## FloydPatterson (Jun 4, 2013)

Let it go B.....let it go 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KOTF (Jun 3, 2013)

I had Timmy the head winning but somehow I didn't come away impressed with his performance


----------



## KOTF (Jun 3, 2013)

dyna said:


> I dreamt that Floyd Mayweather knocked out Mike Tyson.
> Crazy shit


What if Mike Tyson had to fight 10 Floyd Mayweathers?


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

I knew how this fight was going to go down after watching the Pac and Prov fights.

Bradley won that fight. It was as painful to give to Bradley as it was to watch.

Marquez put the mitts on Bradley early when Bradley tried to be Bradley.

Bradley was doing his best Mayweather impression the rest of the fight.

I don't think Bradley raised his stock with that fight. I just think he beat an older (better) fighter due to age.


----------



## DBerry (Jun 11, 2013)

KOTF said:


> What if Mike Tyson had to fight 10 Floyd Mayweathers?


This leads to my idea for a TV show, it would be called 'how Many Chihuahuas Does It Take To bring Down A Man'. It would consist of trying out things like this.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Timothy Bradley SD12 Juan Manuel Marquez

Very close opening round, desperately close, probably a drawn round in an earlier era, I think maybe Bradley just barely barely nicked it based upon the jab to the body early and a couple of sniping jabs late. He also, as Jim Watt says in commentary, does a good job of making Marquez lead, and on the occasions he does so himself, is sensible about it.

Second extremely close and they're fighting in very distinct arenas. A) Sniping from the outside by Bradley with Marquez trying to counter B) Flailing inside with Bradley using size to hold and walk Marquez C) Mid range exchanges when Marquez scores the counter and Bradley wants to immediately react. 

In A), Bradley is doing the better stuff. His jab isn't dominant, but it is fast and has variety and he's scoring with enough punches to make a "little lead" in the round's scoring which ramps up the pressure on Marquez. Of course the Mexican is patient enough to wait it out, but at this range, Bradley is favoured. B) Is uglier with neither one doing really good work yet, and Bradley's superior size and strength helping to neutralise Marquez's general superiority at this range. Nothing meaningful has happened here yet IMO. C) it's very close but Marquez isn't as fast as Bradley and that's letting Bradley in on equal terms, the right hand on the bell to end round two winning him that round probably. Both opening rounds would have been scored 10-10 in a different era IMO.

Bradley showed outstanding judging awareness throughout this fight, really good to see that form a professional. Whenever Marquez landed anything eye-catching he looked to dispute that thirty seconds with his own good work. 

Three extremely close, almost impossible to separate them. I'd go for Marquez based on the right hand in the last ten seconds. Bradley earning the generalship points all over the place though, he controls this fight. I think he'd have been smarting after round three, knowing he had control of the fight but was unable to land enough punches to make it matter.

A third in, and Bradley's strategy, to dominate minimal exchanges that he controls and peck, is working. Marquez lands a beautiful counter left uppercut, one of the great punches in boxing all time, but Bradley just lands a bit more. Marquez does land a nice counter-right in the final seconds to make the round, like all the others, close, but it's a Bradley round and the round that defines the first third of the fight. Bradley using superior speed and freshness to take control and be the general against one of the great ring generals of the Pacquiao-Mayweather era. Impressive.

Fifth - sensational boxing from Bradley. So good to see. I feel horrible for Marquez. Never seen him miss so much in any round ever.

Sixth - Marquez steals it on aggression, a counter left to the heart, and a lead right hand. But very little in it again. At the half way point, you could legitimately score it 2-2-2, but Bradley nicked those close first two rounds IMO. If you want to argue a close scorecard over six, you have to score even rounds which is basically not in the rules the fight was governed under AND not give the Marquez rounds as even, and they were very close too.

Seven - Bradley jabs his way to an excruciatingly close round. A lot of his punches are half-landed but still, Marquez lands only three or four meaningful punches (all left hands). 

Eight - Bradley is brilliant in this round, which he loses! It's a bit mad to say that, but what I mean is that it should be a Marquez round all over - Bradley is missing a bit and Marquez lands a couple of lefts early doors that give him a lead - but with superb judge awareness and generalship he makes it so close and arguable. Very fine mobility, footwork, and very clever at making himself look busy and aggressive. Despite the fact that he spends much of the round on the move, he manages to make himself look aggressive with output, understands the value of punches that aren't landed. Marquez shades it, in the end, with two right hands in the final twenty seconds I think. It was a "must win" round for him and he won it.

Nine - Good round - and another for Marquez, so he's done two in a row at last. It's suddenly looking close for me, 5-4 Bradley. Bradley starts well here, landing a double left hook much loved by the Sky commentary team, but the double Marquez lands in answer, body head, seems to go unnoticed. IMO the commentary team are more hypnotised by Bradley's excellent performance than Marquez, who I thought out-punched Bradley in another low-output round, stealing the round in the last twenty seconds or so.

Ten - Bradley steadies the ship with two right-hands, one of which appears to hurt Marquez. In such a low out-put fight, hurting a guy is akin to a bye for that round. Shame, a Marquez round here puts the cat among the pigeons, but he can't salvage it, even with the decent left he lands in the final thirty seconds. I now have Marquez needing 11 and 12 to draw the fight.

Eleven - Bradley looks tired and Marquez outlands him, the round is still devilishly close, and I had it up for grabs again after Marquez took a lead, but he closed stronger. Throwing a lot of punches and a lot of them hard, but Bradley is right there with him for landed shots. You can see that the "natural" way of things is for Bradley to win these rounds in this round though. Marquez needs to really really put himself in the firing line to dominate a minute. But he does so here to good affect. A Marquez twelfth would be a draw on my card.

Twelfth - first minute, Bradley is moving okay, but he's not so quick away from the puncehs and Marquez takes advantage landing a decent pair of shots to shade the early action IMO, although Bradley lands what sounds like a good punch on the outside of the camera-view too. Almost nothing in it.

Second minute, at the very opening of the second minute Marquez lands a good right hand on Bradley going away, it's not a great punch, but it's a good one - might be the key punch in the round. Bradley walks it off, jabs to the body, Marquez attacks messily and lands another very decent right hand in a tangle. Based on the action in prior rounds, hard to see how Bradley now wins this round. Some posing from Bradley but he lands a cuffing one-two at 1:20 to draw closer. They swap jabs, the swap missed jabs, Marquez misses a big left swing.

Third minute, Bradley needs a big minute to take this round. Marquez half-lands a long-right and half-lands a right to the body. Marquez fighting hard in the last minute but nearly gets dropped by a counter-hook! Makes the round very close, but Marquez nicks the round based on the first 2:50.

So, astonishingly I have this fight a draw. Bradley out-thought Marquez, looked the better general by far, but he threw so little that Marquez was allowed to land key-punches at key-moments to steal key-rounds. It doesn't "feel" right, but I have examined it carefully and can't now argue with my own scoring. No problem with a Bradley win, but this is much closer than I thought watching live shitfaced.

MARQUEZ:3,6,8,9,11,12
BRADLEY: 1,2,4,5,7,10,

So yeah, fair shot Bogo. It's fair, to my surprise, to point out that this fight isn't necessarily as told.


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

McGrain said:


> Timothy Bradley SD12 Juan Manuel Marquez
> 
> Very close opening round, desperately close, probably a drawn round in an earlier era, I think maybe Bradley just barely barely nicked it based upon the jab to the body early and a couple of sniping jabs late. He also, as Jim Watt says in commentary, does a good job of making Marquez lead, and on the occasions he does so himself, is sensible about it.
> 
> ...


Everything you said lends credence to the fact that those in forums like this judged this fight based on smoke and mirrors.
The fact that with his youth and athleticism, Bradley won the fight with his showmanship and body language (which is'nt a scroing criteria)
more so than his actual effective work with his fists.

The realm of 7-5 either way is acceptable, anything beyond that is imo dishonest.

Let me add to this discussion by pointing out that judges in general put alot of emphasis scoring close rounds to the fighter that comes foward.
I would have thought that this criteria would have been on Marquez' side against Bradley.
I mentioned the week this fight happened that the reason why Marquez might have not gotten the benefit of the closer rounds was because of the controversy in scoring that happend just a week or two earlier in Vegas when CJ Ross scored the Mayweather-Canelo fight a draw.

Ross defended her scorecard by citing Canelo being the aggressor, and she got alot of criticism for that.
When that happens, its only natural for other judges in the same jurisdiction to be leary leaning toward the aggressor in a close round in the subsequent events that come after such criticism.

I think that with the rounds being so competive, and with Bradley putting up a better "showmanship" routine, the judges just decided to weigh on that more than they normally would have had CJ Ross not gotten lynched by the media mob after her 114-114 score of Mayweather-Canelo.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogo you need to let it go. Marquez aint got the time left to fight Bradley over and over until he eventually KO's him. He lost a close fight, you can argue for him to have scraped it sure but most people thought Bradley won and that is that. It happens all the time.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

McGrain said:


> Timothy Bradley SD12 Juan Manuel Marquez
> 
> Very close opening round, desperately close, probably a drawn round in an earlier era, I think maybe Bradley just barely barely nicked it based upon the jab to the body early and a couple of sniping jabs late. He also, as Jim Watt says in commentary, does a good job of making Marquez lead, and on the occasions he does so himself, is sensible about it.
> 
> ...


Thanks for scoring McGrain :thumbsup

What you described as those key moments JMM was landing hard punches stealing the rounds is what I saw in the mid-rounds marking the difference.

(BTW-any chance I could get you to review round 1? Some rounds were dead close and I had a hard time scoring but round 1 wasn't one of them. Thought JMM's right sealed the deal. No worries though you already put a lot of effort forth in re-watching and writing down your process.)


----------



## Boogle McDougal (Jun 8, 2012)

Let's face it, folks: the fix was in. They knew when they made the fight it would be a closely contested affair that could go either way. A decision for Bradley was in the cards all along. The actual scoring was nothing but a formality. Most of all, they needed to teach Juan a lesson: authority cannot be challenged...















:hey


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Bogo you need to let it go. Marquez aint got the time left to fight Bradley over and over until he eventually KO's him. He lost a close fight, you can argue for him to have scraped it sure but most people thought Bradley won and that is that. It happens all the time.


I've "let it go", I just want to hear what people think. And more agree with me than previously thought.


----------



## divac. (May 19, 2014)

Boggle said:


> Let's face it, folks: the fix was in. They knew when they made the fight it would be a closely contested affair that could go either way. A decision for Bradley was in the cards all along. The actual scoring was nothing but a formality. Most of all, they needed to teach Juan a lesson: authority cannot be challenged...
> :hey


LOL! I'm laughing, and you might have said it sarcastically, but there's some truth to what you just wrote.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Thanks for scoring McGrain :thumbsup
> 
> What you described as those key moments JMM was landing hard punches stealing the rounds is what I saw in the mid-rounds marking the difference.
> 
> (BTW-any chance I could get you to review round 1? Some rounds were dead close and I had a hard time scoring but round 1 wasn't one of them. Thought JMM's right sealed the deal. No worries though you already put a lot of effort forth in re-watching and writing down your process.)


No i'm not going to rescore anything - I think i'm done with this fight. Plus, it reaches a point where it's unfair to do that. I've scored it honestly, in a single sitting with all the concentration I can muster, like the judges should have - anything beyond that is taking the piss a bit. Finally, those rounds were close and you and I might just stress different scoring credentials.

I'd echo what @Divac says, mostly, in that he says 7-5 either way is fine and maybe go a bit further han him in saying that 8-4 might be okay too given how modern fights are scored. I think a lot of even rounds would be scored here by 1950s judges for example. In judges to pick they help to foster atrocity IMO.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

I also guess it's style which of the 2 styles someone prefers.
Boxing too subjective :lol:


----------



## Oli (Jun 6, 2013)

No Bradley was exellent that night. He clearly won the fight.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Oli said:


> No Bradley was exellent that night. He clearly won the fight.


Provide rounds please.


----------



## Oli (Jun 6, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Provide rounds please.


1,2,3,4,5,7,10,12 (yes I'm giving him the 12th)


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Oli said:


> 1,2,3,4,5,7,10,12 (yes I'm giving him the 12th)


Still don't really understand how Bradley can be given the first. JMM landed the most significant punches, was not outlanded, and neither man had a distinct advantage in any other criteria, certainly not enough to override the shot he landed. I also had the 3rd clear for JMM.

I'm guessing this is your score from the night-of and not done with fresh eyes?


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> I also had the 3rd clear for JMM.


How did you give Marquez round 3 clearly? I thought it was close and that Bradley just edged it.


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

Bradley-Marquez
9-10 (close)
10-9 (close)
9-10 
10-9 (close)
9-10 
10-9 Bradley controls the distance well. JMM is reaching.
10-9 Bradley efficient with the jab. Disrupts JMM combos
10-9 Close
9-10 Clear Marquez. Bradley a little sloppy on D.
9-10 Close
9-10 close
10-9 Had Marquez a bit ahead before the counter


114-114 


Close fight and not a lot of clear rounds. I gave the 8th to Marquez the 1st time, but revised it. I had never seen the fight, so I was surprised to see that it wasn't the dominant performance I heard it was. It's the kind of fight where I whish I had the balls to score 10-10 rounds most of the time like they did in the old days. I think nobody demonstrated his superiority in that fight. Yeah, Bradley shoe-shined but there were a few occasions where they exchanged combos and Marquez never imposed his will in those occasions that should've advantaged him. With his talent, I think he could've countered Timmy better on those occasions to get the win.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Clearly @Bogotazo loves negativity :yep


----------



## Boxed Ears (Jun 13, 2012)

Bogo, I think I scored that slightly in favour of Bradley, but I admit, when I saw people saying Bradley "schooled" Marquez I was really pretty baffled and rolled my eyes a bit.


----------



## igor_otsky (Jul 24, 2012)

divac. said:


> EBradley won the fight with his showmanship and body language


damn divac. you so good


----------



## Mr Magic (Jun 3, 2013)

Watched it twice, had Bradley winning just about.


----------

