The last time I scored it, I had Pacquiao winning 7-5. This time I saw Bradley edging the ninth--the most active back-and-forth round of the fight--which was the only difference on my last card and this one. But the ninth isn't necessarily the singular decisive round for me, because almost every round was close in my eyes--aside from Round 4 (Pacquiao) and 10 and 12 (Bradley), I could see a case being made for either fighter in each round. I think the judges were unfairly castigated for their scoring--they saw what most people didn’t, for whatever reason: a close chess match with even exchanges and even rounds.

If anyone deserves criticism, it’s the broadcast team, particularly Lampley. I am normally a huge Lampley fan, I think he’s fantastic at his job—insightful, energetic, etc. But his bias in this fight was egregious. He credited Pacquiao with dozens of punches that didn’t land. He glossed over dozens that Bradley did land. He fawned over Pacquiao--who did fight well--and pooh-poohed Bradley for not doing things that he *was* doing--making Pacquiao miss, fighting tactically, etc. He even *cut off* his colleagues’ sporadic praise for Bradley. As a play-by-play commentator, fairness is your number one responsibility, especially in a subjective sport like boxing, and Lampley was completely unfair.

In any event, the fight was a *good* fight. Both guys showed a complete skill set and had to work for every clean piece of leather. The offense was tempered, but the battle of wits was just exceptional. Boxing is a thinking man’s sport at its best, and both Pacquiao and Bradley really had to work to outthink their opponent at every moment. I won't be disappointed if the rematch is similar, even if it is controversial or hotly debated.