Who thinks Cotto can drag Mayweather into a brawl?

[BmoreBrawler]

No, me and BMore argue about whether rounds should be scored based on aggressiveness alone. He says it should be a tiebreaker, and I say that it has to be effective aggression, just moving forward doesn't cut it.

Ok, if you have two fighters who are aggressive, obviously the more effective fighter gets the nod. If one fighter is not even aggressive, how can he be seen more highly than the other in this area?

[Fox McCloud]

Ok, if you have two fighters who are aggressive, obviously the more effective fighter gets the nod. If one fighter is not even aggressive, how can he be seen more highly than the other in this area?

I usually score even rounds 10-10 to be honest, instead of giving it to one guy who is charging straight forward.

That being said... I don't find a whole lot of rounds that close to even that I would even have to implement this whole aggression wins rounds doctrine.

Who does more damage is how I judge. I encompasses defense (not getting damaged yourself) ring generalship (putting yourself in good position to do damage and putting him in bad position to do damage), effective aggressiveness and clean hard punching (which I still think are the same thing).

The thing is though, even though those criteria are included, I don't think a fighter gets credit for going through the motions unless they capitalize on weakness shown by their opponent.

If fighter A puts fighter B on the ropes, he is showing good ring generalship, right? But if he isn't able to land a shot, what the **** was it for?

Gotta be damage... aggression can be part of the formula, but doesn't get scored individually.

[THE REED]

I honestly think Floyd is just to smart... he already knows your gameplan, and he knows the solution for it... and he can perform his solution better than you can use your gameplan...

I also would really like to see the fight... and if cotto fights margarito, and beats him... then hes making himself more worth the fight... which is what he needs to do... Floyd looks at it like... he beat zab judah, who i beat, and mosley whose a sparring partner... im also not saying i agree with floyd... but cotto needs to fight the proven prime welters to establish himself to a point where floyd can literally no longer duck him...

If what floyd is interested in the most, is money... then cotto needs to keep building his stock... and I think he is... he is becoming the new trinidad of Puerto Rico, and we all know how well Trinidad could sell fights... eventually he will be to much of a threat, and to big of a payday for Floyd to turn down.... its just not yet.

[BmoreBrawler]

I usually score even rounds 10-10 to be honest, instead of giving it to one guy who is charging straight forward.

That being said... I don't find a whole lot of rounds that close to even that I would even have to implement this whole aggression wins rounds doctrine.

Who does more damage is how I judge. I encompasses defense (not getting damaged yourself) ring generalship (putting yourself in good position to do damage and putting him in bad position to do damage), effective aggressiveness and clean hard punching (which I still think are the same thing).

The thing is though, even though those criteria are included, I don't think a fighter gets credit for going through the motions unless they capitalize on weakness shown by their opponent.

If fighter A puts fighter B on the ropes, he is showing good ring generalship, right? But if he isn't able to land a shot, what the **** was it for?

Gotta be damage... aggression can be part of the formula, but doesn't get scored individually.

damage is fine...but the rules say effective aggression, ring generalship, blah blah blah.

Let me tell you how I used my interpretation of the rules to score the average De La Hoya/Mayweather round for Oscar(assume it was one of the close rounds, I know some rounds were clearly for mayweather):

Effective aggression: Mayweather was not agressive, so Oscar gets the nod.

Ring Generalship: Mayweather was actually forced onto the ropes, for someone who is admittedly not a boxing expert(like 99.9% of the armchair judges on boxingscene) this is a telltale litmus test that he was NOT the ring general. Oscar gets the nod.

Defense: Although Mayweather had better defense in most rounds, it was not significantly better than Oscar when you realize that in fact most of mayweather's jabs were parried. Defense I think can be strictly judged amateur style by punches landed, forget giving style points for slipping or dodging, this isnt figure skating. Mayweather still gets the nod.

Clean, Effective punching: I have serious problems with this, because defining what a clean punch is or isnt in the heat of battle is basically indeterminable. I just look at it as most punches landed and damage done. Basically neutral in this fight.

[Nwahs !!]

Floyd is not the type of fighter that can be dragged into anything. If you couldn't tell this after watching the 50,000 fighters that have tried the same thing, seek medical attention.

[Fox McCloud]

damage is fine...but the rules say effective aggression, ring generalship, blah blah blah.

Let me tell you how I used my interpretation of the rules to score the average De La Hoya/Mayweather round for Oscar(assume it was one of the close rounds, I know some rounds were clearly for mayweather):

Effective aggression: Mayweather was not agressive, so Oscar gets the nod.

Ring Generalship: Mayweather was actually forced onto the ropes, for someone who is admittedly not a boxing expert(like 99.9% of the armchair judges on boxingscene) this is a telltale litmus test that he was NOT the ring general. Oscar gets the nod.

Defense: Although Mayweather had better defense in most rounds, it was not significantly better than Oscar when you realize that in fact most of mayweather's jabs were parried. Defense I think can be strictly judged amateur style by punches landed, forget giving style points for slipping or dodging, this isnt figure skating. Mayweather still gets the nod.

Clean, Effective punching: I have serious problems with this, because defining what a clean punch is or isnt in the heat of battle is basically indeterminable. I just look at it as most punches landed and damage done. Basically neutral in this fight.

And I totally respect that. But the difference for me is in the clean, effective punching category. I thought Mayweather landed a lot of punches from distance, where Oscar cramped himself in some exchanges, where he tried to go to the body.

But like you, I will admit that I am not an expert on judging. To be honest, I think I'm pretty ****ing terrible at it, because I have trouble concentrating on the small details for 12 rounds. I did do it for Mayweather-De La Hoya, but I have decided to stop in the newer fights, mostly because I find that it takes away from my enjoyment when doing so.

[BmoreBrawler]

And I totally respect that. But the difference for me is in the clean, effective punching category. I thought Mayweather landed a lot of punches from distance, where Oscar cramped himself in some exchanges, where he tried to go to the body.

But like you, I will admit that I am not an expert on judging. To be honest, I think I'm pretty ****ing terrible at it, because I have trouble concentrating on the small details for 12 rounds. I did do it for Mayweather-De La Hoya, but I have decided to stop in the newer fights, mostly because I find that it takes away from my enjoyment when doing so.

I dont judge fights anymore for the same reason, it takes all the fun out of it. You want to pretend like its a real fight and not a numbers game. If its controversial, I might rewatch it and score it then.

[Fox McCloud]

I dont judge fights anymore for the same reason, it takes all the fun out of it. You want to pretend like its a real fight and not a numbers game. If its controversial, I might rewatch it and score it then.

Lol, pretty funny that we have had two lengthy arguments about judging recently considering neither of us even judge anymore.

I just sit back, and can kind of tell generally which way a round went (although it isn't 100% accurate). You get a basic feel for who won the fight at the end of the night anyway, so...

Because at the end of the day, being of the 100,000 boxingscene posters who posts THEIR scorecard doesn't matter a ****ing lick. No one really cares how Ray Lewis Jr. or Moofo scored last night's fight.

The only rounds that I do rewatch to score are the ones that I think Harold Lederman just absolutely ****ed up on... like Mayweather-Hatton round 1.

[Scott9945]

Lol, pretty funny that we have had two lengthy arguments about judging recently considering neither of us even judge anymore.

I just sit back, and can kind of tell generally which way a round went (although it isn't 100% accurate). You get a basic feel for who won the fight at the end of the night anyway, so...

Because at the end of the day, being of the 100,000 boxingscene posters who posts THEIR scorecard doesn't matter a ****ing lick. No one really cares how Ray Lewis Jr. or Moofo scored last night's fight.

The only rounds that I do rewatch to score are the ones that I think Harold Lederman just absolutely ****ed up on... like Mayweather-Hatton round 1.

I usually don't keep score either. It takes too much away from the enjoyment of the fight, and you miss certain things too. The judges scoring the fight have to be impartial. I'd rather just watch it the first time with whatever frame of mind I take into it. Why turn something I enjoy so much into a job?

[Fox McCloud]

I usually don't keep score either. It takes too much away from the enjoyment of the fight, and you miss certain things too. The judges scoring the fight have to be impartial. I'd rather just watch it the first time with whatever frame of mind I take into it. Why turn something I enjoy so much into a job?

SO YOU CAN PWN OTHER MEMBERS!!! ,