That old cliche ‘there's no such thing as a certainty' was hammered home with devastating force to punters who backed champion Manny Pacquiao against Timothy Bradley for the WBO welterweight title in Las Vegas.
Bet on boxing and you’ll get a hiding THAT old cliche ‘there's no such thing as a certainty' was hammered home with devastating force to punters who backed champion Manny Pacquiao against Timothy Bradley for the WBO welterweight title in Las Vegas.
Bradley, younger by five years with 29 straight wins, was the 4/1 underdog, against a supposedly fading Pac-Man — one of the truly great fighters across different weight divisions.
The champ has not been without his problems outside the ring and needed his A-game in this his 60th contest to stop the extremely fit American.
And Pacquiao (left), a 1/4 chance, produced just that. He was at his brilliant best, giving Bradley a hiding. At the end, no one in their right mind thought anything other than an easy points win for him. Even Bradley was resigned to defeat and those on the exchanges lumped on Pacquiao at 1.02 and 1/200 with Ladbrokes prior to the decision.
He was miles ahead on all expert cards and even the stats comprehensively favoured the Pac-Man as he landed 253 shots to Bradley's 159 and 190 power punches to Bradley's 108.
So how did the judges award the fight to Bradley on a split decision after he won at most only two of the 12 rounds? It was probably the worst call in boxing history and totally unfathomable, sinking boxing's stained reputation further into the mire.
A rematch is likely to take place around November. Pacquiao is again the 1/4 favourite. Only a masochist would consider having a bet if judges are to continue wearing blindfolds.