When there are too many close rounds in a fight, how do you judge?

If a round is close I give it to the guy who's promoter has paid me off prior to the fight.

An even round is an excuse for not knowing the sport and how to judge a pro fight. Only knockdowns by each participant can make a round close. Theres always a winner in a 3 minute session, the judges need to have experience and knowledge of what to look for. Respected judges don't throw away rounds. Ray.

its time to have open scoring used by ALL boxing organizations.

I disagree. Regardless if they have a belt or not, its a sraight up fight, and should be judged as such. If the challenger got the better of the champion, no matter what degree, then so be it. Champions rise and fall. Good point but how do u score a close round with a Champion defending well fighting back against a Challenger? Whats da point to be challlenger if u cant even challenge a champ and beat him to da punch. i think Champions should have the advantage if fights equal to the challenger except ofcourse if its a mandatory challenger who is chosen by a boxing organization to fight for their title. :bling1:

Depends if they both the same amount of clean shots I give it to the aggressor and person who threw more pushing the pace. Accuracy is nice but the whole point of a fight is to throw punches. The only time I went against this is Hopkins vs Calzaghe because Calzaghe was slapping like a girl not landing anything clean and what hopkins was landing he landed solid.

if its a Title Fight then Champions should have the advantage on every round. In order to be a Champ u need to dominate a Champ. if not title fight then scoring, ring dominance and aggression is my criteria. its :boxing: :wtf: its :chairshot :eek: I disagree. Regardless if they have a belt or not, its a sraight up fight, and should be judged as such. If the challenger got the better of the champion, no matter what degree, then so be it. Champions rise and fall.

I hardly ever come across those kind of fights and I'm an advocate for even rounds, even though I try my best not to go that route. Bit off topic, but brads bending a little low in your avater isnt he, below the waist. But nice and slick, Pac should have punched him to the body a bit more.

I hardly ever come across those kind of fights and I'm an advocate for even rounds, even though I try my best not to go that route.

i'll give it to the guy who lands the cleanest and accurate punches and the one creating the action and also landing shots not just creating actions but getting tagged LOL..

I just stick to your criteria: 1. Ring Generalship 2. Clean Effective Punching 3. Effective Agression 4. Defense If #2 and 3 are too close to call you have to look at "who is fighting whos fight" Defense is the overlooked criteria in scoring rounds though. You rarely here announcers and boxing fans give a fighter around for effective defense. This is the best and only correct answer in this thread. Of course, judges naturally have personal tendencies, but in order to promote consistency across the board, this criteria should be followed.

most people just give it to the fighter they like more :nonono:

if its a Title Fight then Champions should have the advantage on every round. In order to be a Champ u need to dominate a Champ. if not title fight then scoring, ring dominance and aggression is my criteria. its :boxing: :wtf: its :chairshot :eek:

In this fight im not sure the rounds were too close. But the one trying to make the fight ie Pac, and is the champ ie Pac should win the round. Bradley took the mickey out of JMM and said he didnt take the fight to Pac and thats why he lost, and then Bradley does the same as JMM but even worse. He didnt stick to his word, as he couldnt hang with Pac. As usual anyone who fights Pac, tries to react to what Pac does, rather than initiate as they think its safer that way.

:lol1: figures Least I'm honest about it. Most people do same. Thats why I dont score when I watch.

aggression and workrate usually, but thats prob cos I m a PAC fan lol

The way I usually go about scoring is the "who would I rather have been" method after each round. But if it's too close to where I can't even decide who since both fighters did good work, I usually call it even, but I also look at other factors such as: Who's bleeding/swelling/bruised/battered, etc. (this gives me an idea of who's punches are really being more effective) but it's always fun to score close fights, in those types of fights there are no losers.

Only in rare instances can i not figure out who i thought won the round, and in those times i have no problem sayin 10-10. I look for who was most effective, landed the harder punches, was more effective longer, etc. I dont beleive in any of that 'He was coming forward so he was the effective agressor' nonsense.

I probably give it to the guy I'm pulling for. Thats not fair but I think its human nature. Thats why I try not to score when I'm watching a fight live. I think everyone tends to give a close round to the guy they like.

10-10 its simple If you cant decide who won the round, who look for a guy to give the round to?

I just stick to your criteria: 1. Ring Generalship 2. Clean Effective Punching 3. Effective Agression 4. Defense If #2 and 3 are too close to call you have to look at "who is fighting whos fight" Defense is the overlooked criteria in scoring rounds though. You rarely here announcers and boxing fans give a fighter around for effective defense.