Why are brits so naive??

What does this have to do with Brits? You're talking to a moron. @OP i'm British and had DeGale winning by 1 point in a close fight, keep crying like it's some kind of robbery though

which side of that equation would you rather be on ( fictional or NOT) ?!?!?!?!? the end I am on the speaking from experience/factual side of the equation, having had many fights. Fictional is taking up boxing on the presumtion your not going to get hit. The end.

This why aggression/initiating contact is a factor in scoring... whilst on the other hand defending is not a factor in scoring. :pat: Defense is very much a factor in scoring. You guys don't even know the rules.

The rounds Jack won were more dominant than the ones DeGale won but Degale won just as many if not more rounds. It was the same with Ward he got all the close rounds and won but Kovalev did a lot more damage overall. If people don't like it then blame the scoring system which values all 10-9 rounds as equal. I mean in Basketball if you win a quarter 35-21 then lose the next 24-23 it's not 1 each at halftime.

to hit and NOT be hit. How did i know you'd come back with that rhetoric..... Do you have an office job by any chance? Nice theory, but that's bullsh1t mate. Everyone gets clipped. The object of the sport is to HIT the other person. If you get clipped or not is up to your skill, but you cannot win without hitting the other person. This why aggression/initiating contact is a factor in scoring... whilst on the other hand defending is not a factor in scoring.

I assume your point is that DeGale was landing shots that Jack was bonding so should not be winning rounds but rounds are also scored on aggression and activity and no matter how many punches Jack blocks, he was not only being caught by many other punches but he was not as active in many of those rounds himself, nor was he as aggressive in 2 of the 3 championship rounds. Anyway, this isn't a Brit v American argument. Watching the fight without much bias (I'm not a big DeGale) he won. His work was cleaner and more effective. Jack did great o come back in the middle rounds and to finish the 12th. Not enough to win the fight. Plus, what was the first thing that happened when Mayweather said the fight was a robbery? The MAJORITY American fans booed so loudly that it was audible during the interview. On to pof that, they were readily chanting chunky, although a Badou chant around afterwards. maybe i twas in respect of degales grit and heart in the final round but it was obvious a lot of fans in attendance felt degale won...and they happened to be american. More effective?? But he got outlanded by a wide margin... THE BIAS IS REAL.

This is a difference someone who only Googles how fights are scored and someone who has actually taken part in boxing. Activity is most definitely scored whether or not it's written into the criteria are not, do you know why? Activity goes hand in hand with effective aggression, you can't just weak forward and not throw punches, because with no longer effective. Also in close rounds where both guys are landing so so blows, it's often the busier fighter who gets given the round. There, consider yourself schooled. Why would I have to Google how fights are scored? Harold Lederman tells us the four official criteria on almost every HBO broadcast. You don't get to make up your own.

Becuz it's essentially making it a game of tag instead of accuracy and effective telling damage! Compubox was never created for boxing or giving accuracy, it was for activity or for tennis in that matter! If fighter A throws lots of punches but hits mostly elbows and gloves while fighter B fights in spurts but lands harder shots/cleaner...does fighter A win due to activity and what his "flashy" punches look like it's doing?? Technology by now for compubox or whatever should be by now much better after all the ****ed up fights that happened and fighters who risked their lives and sacrifices to be felt cheated due to a system that needs advancement in so many levels! I'm not saying it's the absolute worst and of course it's much better than it was 20- 30 years ago but by now it shoud be much better is what I'm saying! Those numbers tallied give people the perceptions of what certain fighters did or didn't otherwise...whats the point of even showing it in the first place! :lol1: What the hell does compubox have to do with the judges scorecards? OMFG. Compubox has no influence on the result of a fight. :dunce: We really need to have some basic aptitude tests as part of the registration process here.

Aggression is not a scoring criteria. Effective aggression is. There's a difference. Activity is not a scoring criteria at all whatsoever. This is a difference someone who only Googles how fights are scored and someone who has actually taken part in boxing. Activity is most definitely scored whether or not it's written into the criteria are not, do you know why? Activity goes hand in hand with effective aggression, you can't just weak forward and not throw punches, because with no longer effective. Also in close rounds where both guys are landing so so blows, it's often the busier fighter who gets given the round. There, consider yourself schooled.

Really ? Dude , Let it go ... Floyd won . Go make a slow motion highlight reel of the fight for ur buddies or something . Why does one of these guys always sneak into the forums . Who the fook is this guy? Lmak sike naw just wanted to say that! Anyways, no Floyd did win I'm just saying how flawed those old ass judges are at counting punches that most likely are too quick for them to catch and see clearly! Both Pac and Mayweather are some of the fastest fighters on the planet even though both are way past their prime and was much quicker when they were younger! Floyd won it no argument there, his jabs and controlling Pacquiao's aggressiveness by tying up to slow down his rhythm and catching him with jabs to keep him from popping that left hand again is what won it for me! It was a round where the judges did score it for Floyd but i honestly would call it an even since both only landed like 4 punches or 3 equally!

Agreed. Sorta like the Mayweather vs Pacquiao fight in which judges was giving Floyd points for soft touch jabs that Pacquiao was blocking constantly! Heck there was a round in which they scored him 10-2 and Floyd only landed 2 clean semi punches WTF Boxing needs new judges,young and fresh folks with a passion for scoring CLEAN and punches that does more effective damage! Pitty.pat slaps and arm punches and flashy combos or touch jabs needs to affectively be dealt with! Really ? Dude , Let it go ... Floyd won . Go make a slow motion highlight reel of the fight for ur buddies or something . Why does one of these guys always sneak into the forums .

OMFG. Compubox has no influence on the result of a fight. :dunce: You stupid little sh!+. Perception was the word i said! Look backx i clearly said both judges and compubox is flawed....two obvious things!

You were talking about compubox not the official judges. You're retarded. :dunce: My initial post was about both you bag of sh!+. Then i went on about compubox, i stated both are issues that need to be fixed for the advancement of the sport! Clearly you skimmed through and picked what you wanted out of my posts!

If Jack won his rounds more convincingly then maybe they should have been scored 10-8 as opposed to 10-9. There should be some type of scoring mechanism to acknowledge that Badou was more effective when he won his rounds than Degale was. Well the scoring mechanism is another argument completely and you might be right because very rarely you're getting a 10-8 without a knockdown. As i've said in a few posts, often the scorecards can be good cards and still not a true reflection of the fight as a whole. Jack was the better fighter overall last night but i felt DeGale still won 6 rounds because he got 3 very early and nicked 3 others later on but as you say, there's no official way to acknowledge that .

Fights like this and Kovalev-Ward make me feel like judges should give 10-9 to close rounds and 10-8 to clear rounds. The rounds that Jack won were clearly more significant than the rounds that DeGale won, but there's no way for the current scoring system to reflect that

I assume your point is that DeGale was landing shots that Jack was bonding so should not be winning rounds but rounds are also scored on aggression and activity and no matter how many punches Jack blocks, he was not only being caught by many other punches but he was not as active in many of those rounds himself, nor was he as aggressive in 2 of the 3 championship rounds. Aggression is not a scoring criteria. Effective aggression is. There's a difference. Activity is not a scoring criteria at all whatsoever.

Compubox has no influence on the result of the fight. The real judges never see punch stat numbers. You are a moron. Wow, you just proved my point ignoramus! Thanks lmao no need for further conversation! What do the judges at 60 years or sometimes even close to 80 years old actually "see" is my point! Good rebuttal champ!

How is compubox screwing up the sport? Becuz it's essentially making it a game of tag instead of accuracy and effective telling damage! Compubox was never created for boxing or giving accuracy, it was for activity or for tennis in that matter! If fighter A throws lots of punches but hits mostly elbows and gloves while fighter B fights in spurts but lands harder shots/cleaner...does fighter A win due to activity and what his "flashy" punches look like it's doing?? Technology by now for compubox or whatever should be by now much better after all the ****ed up fights that happened and fighters who risked their lives and sacrifices to be felt cheated due to a system that needs advancement in so many levels! I'm not saying it's the absolute worst and of course it's much better than it was 20- 30 years ago but by now it shoud be much better is what I'm saying! Those numbers tallied give people the perceptions of what certain fighters did or didn't otherwise...whats the point of even showing it in the first place!

A glove punch is a BLOCK you can't score points on that.. I assume your point is that DeGale was landing shots that Jack was bonding so should not be winning rounds but rounds are also scored on aggression and activity and no matter how many punches Jack blocks, he was not only being caught by many other punches but he was not as active in many of those rounds himself, nor was he as aggressive in 2 of the 3 championship rounds. Anyway, this isn't a Brit v American argument. Watching the fight without much bias (I'm not a big DeGale) he won. His work was cleaner and more effective. Jack did great o come back in the middle rounds and to finish the 12th. Not enough to win the fight. Plus, what was the first thing that happened when Mayweather said the fight was a robbery? The MAJORITY American fans booed so loudly that it was audible during the interview. On to pof that, they were readily chanting chunky, although a Badou chant around afterwards. maybe i twas in respect of degales grit and heart in the final round but it was obvious a lot of fans in attendance felt degale won...and they happened to be american.

I had it scored a draw. 6 rounds each. DeGale took the first 3 and then 9/10/11. Jack caused much more damage though and won his rounds more convincingly but they're still 10-9 rounds. Some people just remember the aggression and damaged caused and forget it's scored round by round. If we scored from emotion and getting our judgement skewed because a guy is getting beaten up then we could say Maidana won the first Mayweather fight, but he didn't because Floyd managed to just win enough rounds but Floyd took all the punishment in that fight. That's basically how i see this one. DeGale did win 6 rounds but if there HAD to be a winner, i'd say Jack would deserve it. If Jack won his rounds more convincingly then maybe they should have been scored 10-8 as opposed to 10-9. There should be some type of scoring mechanism to acknowledge that Badou was more effective when he won his rounds than Degale was.