Why was Ali's return from exile that much more successful than Tysons?

[Willie Pep 229]

9BF5A9A4-77F4-46A2-B490-316495FD7532.jpeg

Yea looks like Shavers threw almost 200 more power punches and landed almost 70 more power punches.

Ali only dominated the Jab which helped close the total number of punches thrown down to a 170 advantage for Shavers, and a 60 punch advantage landed.

Unless Ali's jab was that paramount in effective aggression it seems such numbers should have given Shavers the decision.

The power punches seem to really tell the story, but the judges thought different.

But I have always been against 'punch counting' as being the paramount determination. Ask Anthony32, he's still pissed at me.

So I don't know, numbers sure favor Shavers.

[Ivich]

9BF5A9A4-77F4-46A2-B490-316495FD7532.jpeg

Unfortunately for your argument this is what you actually said ,copied directly from your post.

"It wouldn't take much effort for me to show how Shavers through about 200 more punches than Ali and landed nearly 100 more."


Note that there is no mention of POWER punches anywhere in your original sentence.

[Ivich]

Yea looks like Shavers threw almost 200 more power punches and landed almost 70 more power punches.

Ali only dominated the Jab which helped close the total number of punches thrown down to a 170 advantage for Shavers, and a 60 punch advantage landed.

Unless Ali's jab was that paramount in effective aggression it seems such numbers should have given Shavers the decision.

The power punches seem to really tell the story, but the judges thought different.

But I have always been against 'punch counting' as being the paramount determination. Ask Anthony32, he's still pissed at me.

So I don't know, numbers sure favor Shavers.

But you were not judging the fight were you?And the three judges that were ,scored it unanimously for Ali.
The principles of judging rely on clean punches landed on the target area, not on the force of those punches.You may very well prefer power punches landing to jabs etc and you would not be alone in that but, on that night those officials preferred Ali's work. Not only the officials by the way , but clearly the ringside press as well.

• Unofficial AP scorecard: 10-5 Ali
• Unofficial UPI scorecard: 8-6-1 Ali

[Willie Pep 229]

But you were not judging the fight were you?And the three judges that were ,scored it unanimously for Ali.
The principles of judging rely on clean punches landed on the target area, not on the force of those punches.You may very well prefer power punches landing to jabs etc and you would not be alone in that but, on that night those officials preferred Ali's work. Not only the officials by the way , but clearly the ringside press as well.

• Unofficial AP scorecard: 10-5 Ali
• Unofficial UPI scorecard: 8-6-1 Ali

I don't think I deserved that jab - I stated that I recognized that the judges scored the fight for Ali. **

Yea I see your point, they may go with what they see as clean and therefore more effective punches than power punches that only partially land or are individual and not part of an coordinated attack.

Judging is an art not a science.

** and even if I hadn't mentioned the judges and Ali winning, which I did, why start the post with a sneer.

[Ivich]

I don't think I deserved that jab - I stated that I recognized that the judges scored the fight for Ali. **

Yea I see your point, they may go with what they see as clean and therefore more effective punches than power punches that only partially land or are individual and not part of an coordinated attack.

Judging is an art not a science.

** and even if I hadn't mentioned the judges and Ali winning, which I did, why start the post with a sneer.

No sneer just a fact,I mentioned that if you preferred power punches as opposed to lighter ones ,ie jabs you would not be alone.Lets face it ,scoring is always pretty subjective Some prefer the guy forcing the fight,being the aggressor,some might prefer the counter puncher, and what do you give for ring generalship? It's up to the individual on the night.My sole point here ,and it wasn't directed at you ,is that contrary to what Queensbury Rules stated it was no robbery and neither was the Young decision for Ali .

[YGriffith]

Tyson didnt make it to the final bell to get gift decisions like Ali.

[StarshipTrooper]

I don't think I deserved that jab - I stated that I recognized that the judges scored the fight for Ali. **

Yea I see your point, they may go with what they see as clean and therefore more effective punches than power punches that only partially land or are individual and not part of an coordinated attack.

Judging is an art not a science.

** and even if I hadn't mentioned the judges and Ali winning, which I did, why start the post with a sneer.

I'd point out that that "The principles of judging rely on clean punches landed on the target area, not on the force of those punches." is how AMATEUR boxing is judged. Professional boxing up until the last 10-15 years was differently: Punch effectiveness absolutely was a factor in scoring. One principle for judging that you'd hear was "Who would you rather be at the end of the round". Professional boxing today is damn near indistinguishable from amateur boxing, and it's a crying shame.

[Ivich]

I'd point out that that "The principles of judging rely on clean punches landed on the target area, not on the force of those punches." is how AMATEUR boxing is judged. Professional boxing up until the last 10-15 years was differently: Punch effectiveness absolutely was a factor in scoring. One principle for judging that you'd hear was "Who would you rather be at the end of the round". Professional boxing today is damn near indistinguishable from amateur boxing.

The principles of judging PROFESSIONAL BOXING are governed by the ABC and have not changed.


The Certification Program continues to state:

“Mentally, a judge MUST know which contestant is winning the round at any given point. [They] should know the score of the round, and the score should immediately be written on the scorecard at the end of the round.”⁷ (Professional Boxing Judges, Chapter V – Scoring The Bout).

When scoring each round, judges are to refer to the Scoring Criteria outlined in the ABC’s Regulatory Guidelines:⁸

“…. Judges are to score each round using the following scoring criteria:

1. 1. Clean punching (power versus quantity).
   2. Effective aggressiveness.
   3. Ring generalship.
   4. Defense.”

The ABC expands upon this in its Certification Program, stating:

”The test to measure the awarding of points for “offensive boxing” should be the number of direct, clean punches delivered with the knuckle part of the closed glove on any part of the scoring zone of the opponent’s body above the belt line. The judges should also consider the effect of blows received versus the number of punches delivered. Punches that are blocked or deflected should not be considered in tabulating your score. Blocked or deflected punches that land foul are not to be considered fouls in the awarding of points at the end of the round.”⁹ (Professional Boxing Judges, Chapter III – Scoring Zone).

It also states:

“Determination should not be mistaken for aggressiveness when one boxer continuously moves forward boring in on the opponent regardless of the number of punches being received. If an attack is not effective, the boxer cannot receive credit for it. In order for the boxer to be effective in their aggressiveness, he or she must force the action and set the tempo of the bout through forward movement. The boxer must score punches while blocking and avoiding the opponents counter punching. An aggressive boxer who continues boring in and getting hit from every angle should not be awarded points based on aggressiveness.”¹⁰ (Professional Boxing Judges, Chapter V – Scoring The Bout).

Finally, the Certification Program provides guidelines as to how a round should be scored numerically:

• “10/9 From a “close” to “moderate” margin
• 10/8 EXTREMELY DECISIVE (without a knockdown)
• 10/8 One knockdown
• 10/7 Two knockdowns
• 10/6 More than (2) two knockdowns
• 10/10 Cannot pick a winner (very rare).”¹¹ (Professional Boxing Judges, Chapter VIII – Scoring Criteria).

………..

“A judge should not only know what a 10/9 round is, but know the degree a boxer is winning the 10/9 round. Either a boxer won a close 10/9 round, a moderate 10/9 round, or a decisive 10/9 round. Extreme decisive may push the score to a 10/8 score depending on the judgment of the judge.” (Professional Boxing Judges, Chapter VIII – Scoring The Bout).
Continue reading this article...

• Tags: ABC Regulatory Guidlines | Association of Boxing Commissions (ABC) | Boxing | Governance | International Boxing Association (AIBA) | International Boxing Federation (IBF) | Regulation | Uniform rules of Boxing Official Certification Program for Judges and Referees | World Boxing Association (WBA) | World Boxing Council (WBC) | World Boxing Organisation (WBO)

Law
The Certification Program continues to state:

“Mentally, a judge MUST know which contestant is winning the round at any given point. [They] should know the score of the round, and the score should immediately be written on the scorecard at the end of the round.”⁷ (Professional Boxing Judges, Chapter V – Scoring The Bout).

When scoring each round, judges are to refer to the Scoring Criteria outlined in the ABC’s Regulatory Guidelines:⁸

“…. Judges are to score each round using the following scoring criteria:

1. 1. Clean punching (power versus quantity).
   2. Effective aggressiveness.
   3. Ring generalship.
   4. Defense.”

[Willow The Wisp]

Jones, Frazier II, Norton II & III, Young and Shavers. Razor thin wins, over supurb opposition. Showing that, be it Ruth, Cobb, Dimaggio, Mantle, Mayes, Aaron, Jeeter or Ali at bat; you don't hit em' ALL out of the park. If it had been just some mere mortal at the helm during the mid 1970s instead of Ali, history would have shown the one title passed around frequently between the likes of those opponents. To say noth of Forman factoring in there. Beleive it. Criticism of Ali????....Silly misadventure.

[Willow The Wisp]

One more quip. You'll never take the subjectively completely out of judging boxing or synchronized swimming.