Bradley is light years ahead of jmm? No way, jmm fought pacquiao 3 times and is a good counter puncher. This fight is very simple, pacquiao will win and thats that. No if ands or buts. Im gonna sprinkle a little bit on pacman by knockout. No confidence from roach? Ur crazy.
Than the CURRENT JMM? Absolutely. Bradley would be a significant favorite if they fought. I'm not talking about JMM in his prime or the one that fought Pacquiao a half dozen years ago.
JMM was in amazing shape last fight and bulked up correctly. (well, that depends on what you consider "correctly" that is but I digress) However, that was the same JMM that went life and death with Katsidis and Juan Diaz and couldn't pull the trigger or lay a glove on Mayweather.
Let me ask you a question: Do you feel Pacquiao won his last fight? Do you feel that the man in the ring that night would have beaten Bradley? As far as I'm concerned, the answer is no on both counts.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DaBestEver24:
Bradley is light years ahead of jmm? No way, jmm fought pacquiao 3 times and is a good counter puncher. This fight is very simple, pacquiao will win and thats that. No if ands or buts. Im gonna sprinkle a little bit on pacman by knockout. No confidence from roach? Ur crazy.
Than the CURRENT JMM? Absolutely. Bradley would be a significant favorite if they fought. I'm not talking about JMM in his prime or the one that fought Pacquiao a half dozen years ago.
JMM was in amazing shape last fight and bulked up correctly. (well, that depends on what you consider "correctly" that is but I digress) However, that was the same JMM that went life and death with Katsidis and Juan Diaz and couldn't pull the trigger or lay a glove on Mayweather.
Let me ask you a question: Do you feel Pacquiao won his last fight? Do you feel that the man in the ring that night would have beaten Bradley? As far as I'm concerned, the answer is no on both counts.
Than the CURRENT JMM? Absolutely. Bradley would be a significant favorite if they fought. I'm not talking about JMM in his prime or the one that fought Pacquiao a half dozen years ago.
JMM was in amazing shape last fight and bulked up correctly. (well, that depends on what you consider "correctly" that is but I digress) However, that was the same JMM that went life and death with Katsidis and Juan Diaz and couldn't pull the trigger or lay a glove on Mayweather.
Let me ask you a question: Do you feel Pacquiao won his last fight? Do you feel that the man in the ring that night would have beaten Bradley? As far as I'm concerned, the answer is no on both counts.
I do think that version of Pacquiao would beat Bradley. Pacquiao's camp claims Pac didn't perform plyometrics in training camp and that's why he didn't look as explosive. The next excuse was leg cramps and then the next excuse was marital issues. I thought Pacquiao looked super explosive that night but his moves simply didn't work against an intelligent Marquez who: knew what to expect, how to defend and counter, and was possibly roiding (I have my suspicions about a 38 yr old Marquez).
Pacquiao's best weapon has always been his left cross. The power in a cross is multiplied when fighting a shorter opponent. Pacquiao has shown excellent power against bigger fighters and I expect him to look even better vs the shorter Bradley. I agree that Pacquiao's past and recent opponents have been hand-picked (old or flawed), but I believe Freddie Roach when he says Bradley is simply good not great and is unimpressive.
0
Quote Originally Posted by walktheline:
Than the CURRENT JMM? Absolutely. Bradley would be a significant favorite if they fought. I'm not talking about JMM in his prime or the one that fought Pacquiao a half dozen years ago.
JMM was in amazing shape last fight and bulked up correctly. (well, that depends on what you consider "correctly" that is but I digress) However, that was the same JMM that went life and death with Katsidis and Juan Diaz and couldn't pull the trigger or lay a glove on Mayweather.
Let me ask you a question: Do you feel Pacquiao won his last fight? Do you feel that the man in the ring that night would have beaten Bradley? As far as I'm concerned, the answer is no on both counts.
I do think that version of Pacquiao would beat Bradley. Pacquiao's camp claims Pac didn't perform plyometrics in training camp and that's why he didn't look as explosive. The next excuse was leg cramps and then the next excuse was marital issues. I thought Pacquiao looked super explosive that night but his moves simply didn't work against an intelligent Marquez who: knew what to expect, how to defend and counter, and was possibly roiding (I have my suspicions about a 38 yr old Marquez).
Pacquiao's best weapon has always been his left cross. The power in a cross is multiplied when fighting a shorter opponent. Pacquiao has shown excellent power against bigger fighters and I expect him to look even better vs the shorter Bradley. I agree that Pacquiao's past and recent opponents have been hand-picked (old or flawed), but I believe Freddie Roach when he says Bradley is simply good not great and is unimpressive.
I do think that version of Pacquiao would beat Bradley. Pacquiao's camp claims Pac didn't perform plyometrics in training camp and that's why he didn't look as explosive. The next excuse was leg cramps and then the next excuse was marital issues. I thought Pacquiao looked super explosive that night but his moves simply didn't work against an intelligent Marquez who: knew what to expect, how to defend and counter, and was possibly roiding (I have my suspicions about a 38 yr old Marquez).
Pacquiao's best weapon has always been his left cross. The power in a cross is multiplied when fighting a shorter opponent. Pacquiao has shown excellent power against bigger fighters and I expect him to look even better vs the shorter Bradley. I agree that Pacquiao's past and recent opponents have been hand-picked (old or flawed), but I believe Freddie Roach when he says Bradley is simply good not great and is unimpressive.
the confidence is there..
0
Quote Originally Posted by DatMofoThere85:
I do think that version of Pacquiao would beat Bradley. Pacquiao's camp claims Pac didn't perform plyometrics in training camp and that's why he didn't look as explosive. The next excuse was leg cramps and then the next excuse was marital issues. I thought Pacquiao looked super explosive that night but his moves simply didn't work against an intelligent Marquez who: knew what to expect, how to defend and counter, and was possibly roiding (I have my suspicions about a 38 yr old Marquez).
Pacquiao's best weapon has always been his left cross. The power in a cross is multiplied when fighting a shorter opponent. Pacquiao has shown excellent power against bigger fighters and I expect him to look even better vs the shorter Bradley. I agree that Pacquiao's past and recent opponents have been hand-picked (old or flawed), but I believe Freddie Roach when he says Bradley is simply good not great and is unimpressive.
Actually, I thought that was one of the biggest displays of uncertainty I've seen from them. Hardly the brash bravado they've (specifically Roach) have shown in the past.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DaBestEver24:
the confidence is there..
Actually, I thought that was one of the biggest displays of uncertainty I've seen from them. Hardly the brash bravado they've (specifically Roach) have shown in the past.
Actually, I thought that was one of the biggest displays of uncertainty I've seen from them. Hardly the brash bravado they've (specifically Roach) have shown in the past.
Ur killing me. U must be dumb to think the confidence is low from roach. Ur just trying to stick with ur original thoughts and dont wanna give in when ur wrong. Shi shi nai nai for bradley come saturday night
0
Quote Originally Posted by walktheline:
Actually, I thought that was one of the biggest displays of uncertainty I've seen from them. Hardly the brash bravado they've (specifically Roach) have shown in the past.
Ur killing me. U must be dumb to think the confidence is low from roach. Ur just trying to stick with ur original thoughts and dont wanna give in when ur wrong. Shi shi nai nai for bradley come saturday night
Ur killing me. U must be dumb to think the confidence is low from roach. Ur just trying to stick with ur original thoughts and dont wanna give in when ur wrong. Shi shi nai nai for bradley come saturday night
How am I wrong? Manny in particular was rather "mum" the whole time. Not a classic Manny chuckle, no predictions from Roach, just a bunch of ass kissing. "He wasn't our first choice" reads deeper than them not getting Mayweather.
They wanted no part of Bradley. They couldn't lure Cotto into a rematch. They didn't want Marquez again and certainly didn't want to negotiate a higher cut for him in a rematch. A few other guys fell through before they pulled the trigger on this fight at this point in time. It was going to happen after Bradley signed with Top Rank but wasn't supposed to happen just yet.
If you think it's "business as usual" at Team Pacquiao you're wrong. That's not a matter of opinion, it's fact. It may very well be Shi shi nai nai for Bradley Saturday. However, we've already seen the best of Pacquiao. We haven't seen the best of Bradley. Be acutely aware of that fact.
It still probably won't matter, as Bradley would probably have to beat Manny with the ring post to get the nod on the cards. As long as a fight with Mayweather is still possible although not probable, nobody is going to fuck with that type of money.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DaBestEver24:
Ur killing me. U must be dumb to think the confidence is low from roach. Ur just trying to stick with ur original thoughts and dont wanna give in when ur wrong. Shi shi nai nai for bradley come saturday night
How am I wrong? Manny in particular was rather "mum" the whole time. Not a classic Manny chuckle, no predictions from Roach, just a bunch of ass kissing. "He wasn't our first choice" reads deeper than them not getting Mayweather.
They wanted no part of Bradley. They couldn't lure Cotto into a rematch. They didn't want Marquez again and certainly didn't want to negotiate a higher cut for him in a rematch. A few other guys fell through before they pulled the trigger on this fight at this point in time. It was going to happen after Bradley signed with Top Rank but wasn't supposed to happen just yet.
If you think it's "business as usual" at Team Pacquiao you're wrong. That's not a matter of opinion, it's fact. It may very well be Shi shi nai nai for Bradley Saturday. However, we've already seen the best of Pacquiao. We haven't seen the best of Bradley. Be acutely aware of that fact.
It still probably won't matter, as Bradley would probably have to beat Manny with the ring post to get the nod on the cards. As long as a fight with Mayweather is still possible although not probable, nobody is going to fuck with that type of money.
No prediction from roach? He said pacquiao is gonna end it in the late rounds and he doesnt see it going the distance. Team pacquiao is confident and u can tell bradley feels like they arent respecting his skill and training. The only way bradley can win is by knockout but that aint gonna happen. Bradley will cover up in the late rounds and if he wants to trade wit pacquiao then we kno he'll b sleeping on the canvas.
0
No prediction from roach? He said pacquiao is gonna end it in the late rounds and he doesnt see it going the distance. Team pacquiao is confident and u can tell bradley feels like they arent respecting his skill and training. The only way bradley can win is by knockout but that aint gonna happen. Bradley will cover up in the late rounds and if he wants to trade wit pacquiao then we kno he'll b sleeping on the canvas.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
