Criticism of Paul vs Tyson continues: It wasn't boxing, it was sad... I don't want to see any more of these

Jake Paul's recent victory over boxing legend Mike Tyson has become a polarizing topic in the boxing world, with questions surrounding the legitimacy and dynamics of the fight. Despite Paul's unanimous decision win in the eight-round special-rules bout at AT&T Stadium, critics and fans have raised doubts about the competitive nature of the match.

Speculation about the fight being "scripted" or "rigged" began circulating on online forums immediately after the event. While the scripted theory was widely dismissed, another narrative emerged claiming that Jake Paul may have deliberately held back against the 58-year-old Tyson.

Veteran journalist and ESPN boxing insider Mike Coppinger suggested that Paul "clearly carried Mike Tyson." According to Coppinger, Paul avoided exploiting Tyson's vulnerabilities, choosing instead to put on a show for casual boxing fans.

"It was not boxing at all; it was a kind of a sad event," Coppinger noted.

"I don't want to see any more of these events."

Coppinger even claimed that if Paul had wanted to, he could have ended the fight with a knockout in the opening round. However, he argued that Paul opted for restraint, aware of the backlash he might face for aggressively defeating a boxing icon.

Timothy Bradley pushes back

Not everyone agrees with Coppinger's assessment. Former two-division world champion Timothy "Tim" Bradley vehemently disagreed, asserting that Paul's performance wasn't calculated restraint but simply reflective of his limitations as a fighter.

"You're telling me Jake Paul let off the gas? He sucks as a fighter. He was afraid," Bradley stated.

Bradley dismissed the notion that Paul showed comion or deliberately held back. Instead, he argued that Paul's evasive tactics were out of fear of getting knocked out.

"He didn't want any part of an exchange with Mike Tyson," Bradley said, adding that the fight showcased "Jake Paul at his absolute best."