When exactly did work rate become part of the scoring criteria?

Chavez intentionally didn't make weight, so that he could control the ring by being gassed after the third round, so he could land 3 big punches per round, so he could control the pace in a ninja like fashion, and be the ring general by getting backed up by the smaller man, while nearly having a heart attack. Master mind. A plan only a genius could understand.

What part of the whole 'work rate doesn't factor into professional boxing scoring' do you fail to grasp? There's no sense in attempting to educate a dunce who seems content to continue citing a scoring criteria that doesn't exist. Put your two inch pecker away and go instigate a circle jerk elsewhere. You've done a nice job ignoring absolutely everything other than "work rate", you simple twit. You keep falling back on "work rate" while paying no attention to any other aspect of the fight. Keep showing your ignorance, champ.

Quote: Originally Posted by prinzemanspopa I must have missed out on the articles notifying us all of the moderation to the traditional scoring criteria. I can only assume there was some sort of moderation due the large number of people who justify their scorecards based on an opponents work rate (or lack of.) I ain't quite sure if you've got a particular fight in mind, but I guess most people are thinking of the category of 'effective aggression'. Of course, merely throwing a lot of punches is not 'effective' if they are blocked or don't land, but even lighter punches can throw an opponent off their game, frustrate and tire or weaken them. It's effective if it keeps your opponent from throwing punches back at a higher rate. Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Since the 1700s.

poor example. klitschko knocked him out. He also dominated him on a round-by-round basis, so no.

The numbers also tell us that Tony Thompson lander more punches than Wladimir Klitschko in their first fight, yet the actual bout itself was comprehensively one-sided. Why do you think the fight itself was an entirely different story to what the numbers gave us? poor example. klitschko knocked him out.

Vera get's robbed princepooper: what a perfect time for me to attention whore! and tell them about how great my boxing knowledge is go log your CJ Ross out persona and go fvck yourself You're the one attention whoring in my thread right now, lad. Not too dissimilar from that time you spent all night posting messages on my channel in response to a bit of red k. Now jog the f*ck on, son. Im not sure you know what work rate actually means in the context of scoring a fight It's got f*ck all to do with scoring a fight.

when sir joe calzaghe turned pro. he is a true innovator. he invented a new way to win without landing clean punches.

Im not sure you know what work rate actually means in the context of scoring a fight

Are you talking about the Chavez/Vera fight? That wasn't just work rate. Vera landed more and controlled the pace of that fight. It was effective aggression. If you are talking about the sport in general, I agree. ^^^This. The one time in recent history where the judges don't seem blinded by activity alone and score harder, cleaner shots, they STILL get it wrong. Because Vera wasn't just throwing a lot of punches, his punches were getting through and landing clean. They just weren't as hard of shots as JCC Jr. Work rate isn't apart of scoring, but if one fighter is busier while landing more clean punches, they should typically win the fight. The problem recently was fighters were getting credit for just being active (throwing a lot of punches). I could see if the number of clean punches landed between Vera and JCC were close but Vera was consistently landing more CLEAN punches throughout the fight than JCC...especially the late rounds. And despite the argument that JCC landed the harder shots, his face told a different story. There are close decisions that can go either way...there are wrong decisions where the fight is close and the judges get it wrong...then there are robberies...this was a bit of a robbery.

Each fight is unique,, there is so many variables like clean punching, ring generalship, power of the shots, round by round scoring, etc..... I think there is no one way to score fights since all fights are different with different elements involved... last nights chavez-vera fight i had 96-94 vera... but it was close and 95-95 would have been acceptable,, I could even see 1 judge having it 96-94 for chavez but not all 3..... When scoring fights, i see who is fighting "their" fight, and dictating the the way the round is fought.... I dont care about punch stats, that doesnt tell the story of the fight.... Example: a fighter can throw a punch of bunches in a few select rounds but not do much for alot of rounds, yet punchstats will show he threw 1000 punches, yet he threw 600 of them in 4 rounds and the other 8 he was getting outboxed....... Calzaghe threw alot of punches but he also dictated the pace and ring generalship,, a guy like hopkins doesnt throw alot, but gets his opponents to drop the workrate, and they fight his fight, and hopkins slowly breaks them down... so many different elements to each fight, i dont think there is a clear cut, cookie-cutter way to score fights,,, you just need to watch and determine who his winning the round and at the end add up the points...... This is exactly what I do in scoring a fight. And compubox says absolutely nothing...it is nothing more than a "fun fact" to be used as fodder for an argument one way or another.

Chavez deliberately fought at a measured pace, forced Vera into following him around the ring (Note: following, not cutting the ring off), picked his shots and delivered them with the sort of precision and accuracy that so clearly separated the two last night. poor guy...

Each fight is unique,, there is so many variables like clean punching, ring generalship, power of the shots, round by round scoring, etc..... I think there is no one way to score fights since all fights are different with different elements involved... last nights chavez-vera fight i had 96-94 vera... but it was close and 95-95 would have been acceptable,, I could even see 1 judge having it 96-94 for chavez but not all 3..... When scoring fights, i see who is fighting "their" fight, and dictating the the way the round is fought.... I dont care about punch stats, that doesnt tell the story of the fight.... Example: a fighter can throw a punch of bunches in a few select rounds but not do much for alot of rounds, yet punchstats will show he threw 1000 punches, yet he threw 600 of them in 4 rounds and the other 8 he was getting outboxed....... Calzaghe threw alot of punches but he also dictated the pace and ring generalship,, a guy like hopkins doesnt throw alot, but gets his opponents to drop the workrate, and they fight his fight, and hopkins slowly breaks them down... so many different elements to each fight, i dont think there is a clear cut, cookie-cutter way to score fights,,, you just need to watch and determine who his winning the round and at the end add up the points......

And the simple fact is that a large portion of those disputing the decision - or even worse, crying robbery - are continually using a criteria that does not exist with regards to judging a professional boxing match. Besides, this topic goes far beyond the Chavez-Vera fight. This topic was mostly inspired by another topic on another forum that references the fact that this is a relatively new phenomenon. Something that coincided with the growing presence of the compubox system on television and the introduction of the computer scoring system in the amateurs. Do you have a website that indicates how to judge a round? I ask not to be a jerk or anything like that. I ask because I've tried to find something and can find nothing. I thought Chavez had to get a knockout to win and scored it for Vera. I don't recall my exact score, but believe I had Vera winning enough rounds going in to the 9th that Chavez mathematically had to at least knock him down. Now, how I judge a round: It is subjective for me..I look at what is the apparent gameplan for the fighter and see how effectively he is pulling that perceived gameplan. IN other words, which fighter is making the other fighter fight his fight. With that in mind, I saw Vera constantly keeping Chavez at bay with flurries of punches. THe majority of the fight, Chavez was stalking (and that's a generous assertion, as I think he was simply lost). This "stalking" led Chavez to throwing only a few punches a round that landed. But did the punches matter? He was out there to break down and beat up Vera. I didn't see this happen. I didn't see Vera get deterred with Jr.'s punches. For the most part, he took them well and usually responded with a flurry of punches. What did Chavez do? He landed some good shots, no doubt, but I only saw him go for the kill once when he did. ONCE! This is horrible. This scoring was fairly easy. Vera's workrate allowed for him to be effective in nullifying Chavez. Sure, not everything landed, but it kept Jr. from landing at will. For those giving the argument that Chavez was picking his shots....if you can't be effecting with those shots that are picked, you have to change up your plan. Chavez didn't and he was as effective as Vera. That's about it.

Vera get's robbed princepooper: what a perfect time for me to attention whore! and tell them about how great my boxing knowledge is go log your CJ Ross out persona and go fvck yourself Theirs quiet a few cj rosses in the building today.

Whining, crying, looking to the ref for help throughout the fight. Letting the smaller man out work you, push you back, out land you, and control the pace of the fight. What part of the whole 'work rate doesn't factor into professional boxing scoring' do you fail to grasp? There's no sense in attempting to educate a dunce who seems content to continue citing a scoring criteria that doesn't exist. Chavez deliberately threw one punch at a time and deliberately looked gassed while Vera pretty out fought him...you dont know sh1t Put your two inch pecker away and go instigate a circle jerk elsewhere.

At points in the fight Vera was landing a lot of clean punches. His work-rate was high while Chavez's was low. Do you just not score those Vera punches because of the perception he can't hurt Chavez at the weight? That doesn't seem right. I would have been happiest with a draw fwiw.

Whining, crying, looking to the ref for help throughout the fight. Letting the smaller man out work you, push you back, out land you, and control the pace of the fight. That's the fight plan of a god damn champion, right there.

Don't worry lad, you're not the first misguided individual to confuse plodding aggression with effective aggression. I was the same way when I started watching boxing two years ago. Says the guy who thinks Chavez was "deliberately" gassed from the 3rd round on. And all that looking to the ref for help? That must have been part of this master plan, too? And screaming at the ref, before walking back to his corner like a beaten man? All part of the plan. That's ****ing brilliant. Educate me, oh wise one.

If one fighter throws 100 punches in a round and lands 25 while the other throws 30 and lands 10, do u give it to the guy who actually pushed the fight, threw and landed more, or to the guy who landed at a higher percentage although threw and landed a lot less? In that scenario I have to give it to the guy with the higher work rate.