>First, I do reject the idea that Pacquiao was dominant in >their fight, even if some people act like it's a crazy notion. > Pacquiao did *not* land that often against Bradley, >regardless of what compubox says. And Bradley had two injured >feet, which often seems to be forgotten or ignored.
I agree w/ all of that. But that still doesn't mean Bradley won the fight - he didn't. Pacquiao actually looked off in that fight to me, but Bradley was even more off and barely landed anything of substance himself. Pacquiao won that fight simply by outworking Bradley in sort of a bad night for boxing all around in terms of the fight being underwhelming and the judicial competence being bewildering.
>The only guy who has landed against Bradley consistently was >Prov, and that's because in that fight, Bradley *deliberately* >chose to abandon the skills that make him elite--ring IQ and >elusiveness. That he beat Marquez more decisively than anyone >sans Mayweather is only confirmation of his status IMO.
I didn't think his win vs. Marquez was particularly decisive - but it was impressive. I think Ruslan showed that with superior firepower, you can beat Bradley because he doesn't have enough power to hold off stronger fighters *if* they can land...which is a big if, of course. However, Bradley will give you opportunities to land because as slippery and skilled as he is at evading punches, there are moments in a fight where he can't resist slugging, and that does not favor him against big punchers like pacquiao. So it will be interesting to see if he can resist trading with pacquiao, which to me is his only chance to win in that fight.
Where Bradley *is* elite to me is in willpower. Rarely have I seen a power fight with his type of resilient spirit. I just don't think he's going to be busy enough to beat Pacquiao. Bad matchup for him.