Tag Archives: Timothy Bradley

blog, boxing, diversity, news, race, sports

Pacquiao Bradley II: That’s not your prep school classmate, that’s the boxing match HBO can’t seem to hype enough

When I saw Manny Pacquiao and Timothy Bradley fight for the first time on June 9, 2012, I was like most of the free world: Dumbfounded by the results.

Pacquiao clearly dominated the fight, though Bradley seemed to finish strong. Still, it wasn’t enough for a rally that actually could win the fight. How do you say: “Peex.”

Who needs an undercover camera? It was there for all to see. We knew who won the fight two years ago.

And now Pac Bradley 2 is back before Easter. For redemption?

Jim Lampley, the HBO announcer/sportscaster, on one radio show recently said the fight  wasn’t about a fix, but more about “bad judging.”

Lampley’s a good guy, but he has his biases working for the network that has a monopoly on the live fight.

There was something smelly about that fight, and two years doesn’t sufficiently deodorize the matter.

But we’re going to have to wait for someone’s deathbed confession before we get the real truth.

In the meantime, Pacquiao needs money. He’s motivated by taxes, and the peso/dollar exchange rate. And he has a whole barangay for an entourage.

ESPN has both fighters getting $6 million, but Pacquiao gets a guaranteed $20 million according to a report last week.

We also don’t have much time left to admire Pacquiao, in all honesty.

I’ve been saying he should retire now. But he’s on record saying “two more years.”

So for curiosity sake, I will lift my moratorium.

Pacquiao is the Filipinos’ alter ego, and I’m willing to suspend my disdain for pro boxing to watch him—just to see if he has anything left. The fight might be closer with two years for Bradley to get better and Pacquiao to get older.

Consider a graph with two lines:  If P is at a high level but  arcing down, and B is at a lower level but still rising, if the fight is taking place where the lines intersect it could be a toss up. If the  lines are close but not intersecting, then P should still have enough of an edge. That’s where I think we are.  Based on the last fights of both, Bradley gave Provodnikov a good fight. P gave Rios a beating. Based on that Freddie Roach puts Bradley as similar to Rios. But that Provodnikov fight of Bradley was better than that.  And let me not forget that Bradley/Marquez fight, where Bradley fought a completely different style. It all points to Bradley getting better, whereas Pacquiao is getting older. So we may be close to that P/B intersection, but not quite to make it a toss-up.

Prediction? Lots of rounds 10-9 Pacquiao, with Pac the ultimate winner.

(Live tweeting here at www.amok.com and on twitter@emilamok

blog, news, sports

Affirmative action, Timothy Bradley,Jr., and the suckerpunch heard round the world

It’s funny what people have reacted to in my post-fight  post on the Pacquiao/Bradley fight on sfgate.com

I said that the outrageously bogus decision in favor of Bradley could have been “boxing’s affirmative action.”

I found the notion funny.

To me it’s as clear as “why did the chicken cross the road?”

But for those who don’t share my sense of humor, allow me to explain. 

Tim Bradley did not deserve to win.  The judges inexplicably gave him the fight. This is not good.

The standard anti-affirmative action stance is that affirmative action is often thought to benefit the undeserving.  Bradley certainly was undeserving.

If you didn’t get the joke, the joke was on you.

When I support affirmative action it is always about making sure the underserved and underrepresented get a fair chance. But recipients have to be qualified on the merits. They have to be truly deserving.  That’s always been the true intent of affirmative action.

By using the phrase in my boxing post, I was mocking the traditional sense of affirmative action used by anti-affirmative action folks.

How else could Bradley be given the championship? It wasn’t because of his great skill to punch air and miss Pacquiao. The stuff of champions? No.

Another reader suggested that I was anti-black and  showed I was OK with affirmative action for me, but not for thee.

Once again, my stand in favor of affirmative action in some people’s mind favors  blacks and Latinos and hurts Asian Americans. So any criticisim of me on that point makes no sense.

So now that’s cleared up, there’s still this small matter of who won that damn fight.

Glad to see other fighters like Andre Ward chime in that Bradley should give back the belt. That would be interesting.

Won’t happen.

With their bad decision, the judges are simply reminding us that this is part of the “joy” of boxing–the post-ring debate.

And it goes on because the absolute “truth” can’t really be had unless one fighter can’t answer the bell.

You want certainty, knock the guy out. Until then, if you’ve got eyes, you’ve got an opinion. Box on.

Those who prefer logic bring up Pacquaio’s last fight with Juan Manuel Marquez and say Marquez should have won that.  They call the Bradley fight “karma.” B.S. The Marquez fights were actually close, and could have gone either way. 

The Pacquiao Bradley fight was not 115-113 close, and certainly not in Bradley’s favor.

In fact, many of the conspiracy theories out there now figure Arum needed to pump up Bradley’s credibility to keep his cash cow Pacquiao boxing until the guy everyone really wants to see Pacquiao fight –Floyd Mayweather, Jr.–gets out of jail. Do we really want to see a Pacquaio Marquez IV?  Or do we want to see “Manny’s Revenge”?  Arum has a need to keep things interesting. He owns a piece of all the boxers. Conflict of interest is just part of the professional game, which is as close to a monopoly as it gets. The state of boxing smells. And if it didn’t bother us enough before last weekend, maybe we just got used to the smell.

Still, some of us more interested in the sport of boxing try to keep the “sweet science” separate from boxing’s bitter, venal world that commingles high-stakes  business and gambling.

This weekend’s suckerpunch was our wake-up call. It can’t be done.

The only thing we can do is act as consumers. Pay-per-view? Not with my hard earned dough.

Also see my pre-fight column where I question if Pacquiao has the desire to fight any longer.  His post-fight demeanor has been very “Love they neighbor.”  Maybe religion is his calling. Or maybe he figures the “lost brain cell to earned dollar” ratio in boxing is still in his favor. He can roll in the cash until early dementia sets in. He can quit, stay healthy or fight me.

And I know he won’t fight me now,  because he knows I can beat him. 

I just need the right judges.