How do you score a fight?

[Steak]

lets face it, we all have different criteria and opinions when it comes to scoring rounds. what do you consider the most when juding rounds?

Me? My scoring is very simple and straightfoward:
Whoever does the most damage in a round wins it.

I know, I know, people will say 'wtf you have no idea how to score a fight, what about clean punching, defense, effective aggression, etc?!'

well, lets think about that.
If youre the one landing the harder, cleaner punches...then youre the one doing more damage with your punches
If youre the one with the effective aggression(in other words, being successful in offense without wasting energy and getting hit) then youre the one doing more damage.
If you have good defense that is actually working, then you shouldnt be taking as much damage...which makes it easier to be the one doing more damage.
And ring generalship is just buill****, **** it. it basically means 'who is in command of the fight', which is another way of saying 'youre winning'. why should you get points just because youre fighting in 'your' territory?

anyways, thats my take on it.

[Thread Stealer]

I go with the 4 categories, and as Harold Lederman says whenever I watch an HBO fight, STRONG EMPHASIS on clean punching. Of course, he says that but doesn't always score it that way, as he too often scores for ineffective aggression.

Clean punching is by far what I look for most.

[El Chicano]

While I'm **** faced

[Spray_resistant]

I score based on who is landing clean punches throughout the round. let me say that all of the work one fighter has done in a round does not become erased just because his opponent land 1 or 2 big shots ex. John/Juarez, Pac/JMM. I score a round by who won the round over all, not who had what was seemingly the most impressive punch of the round. Keep in mind no where does it say you have to hurt opponents at all to wins fight.ex. Calderon, Mallinaggi.

When there are not enough clean punches landed in a round for effective scoring of that round I go with who is preventing the fight from occurring and who is trying to make the fight ex. Hopkins/Wright.

[illmatickid]

i score based on who outboxes who, who was more effective, who controls the round

to me its not the stronger fighter that wins the fight its the smarter and more skilled fighter

[Steak]

I score based on who is landing clean punches throughout the round. let me say that all of the work one fighter has done in a round does not become erased just because his opponent land 1 or 2 big shots ex. John/Juarez, Pac/JMM. I score a round by who won the round over all, not who had what was seemingly the most impressive punch of the round. Keep in mind no where does it say you have to hurt opponents at all to wins fight.ex. Calderon, Mallinaggi.

When there are not enough clean punches landed in a round for effective scoring of that round I go with who is preventing the fight from occurring and who is trying to make the fight ex. Hopkins/Wright.

doing damage does not necessarily mean hurtin an opponent.
all punches do damage.

[daggum]

i score for whoever throws more. who cares about landing(like that even matters)

[Spray_resistant]

doing damage does not necessarily mean hurtin an opponent.
all punches do damage.

In my view a fighter would pretty much have to get a kd or really dominate a later part of the round to erase their opponents smart boxing earlier in the round that may not have been causing much damage....a couple damaging punches just don't justify me giving them the round and discounting all of the other fighters work.....too many ppl score based on the last impressionable thing they saw, I view that as incorrect scoring.

[tyger]

Effective Agression
Clean punching
ring generalship
and
which guy is the hometown fighter

[MANGLER]

As they've said on TV, who would you rather be at the end of the rd, ie. who was more effective? Not necessarily who threw more or even landed more, tho that does come into play. But largely, whose punches were more effective