It's the Scoring System

[ELPacman]

Here's another factor. Fighting a guy who lives in Vegas in Vegas. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Fraud Jr. set the pattern. As long as you basically fight in your adopted town, they're going to give you the benefit of the doubt on ANY swing rd or close, whatever you want to call it. Haney basically has Vegas in his pocket now. Unfortunately, like Fraud Jr. he's boring as f**k. So we're going to have to see his ugly mug as we did Mayweather for a bit more unless someone knocks him the f**k out.

[buddyr]

I wish they would sometimes give 10-8 scores in dominant rounds of close fights, like Lomas round 11. It could help reflect the fight more clearly I think.

you know goddamn well that wans't a 10-8 round hahahaha. At the end of the round, Haney was backing him up. He blew his load haha. wtf

[sicko]

...you will never get rid of the corruption in boxing...EVER! It was built off of it

News Flash Boxing Fans...Corruption can go over the head of the Commission, Promoters and even the fighters head. Very Wealthy Gamblers can easily get to a Judge and slip him money to sway the outcome of the fight to assure that they win their Bets that is where Corruption comes from it is not about Promoters assuring their fighter wins. Nobody is Dumb enough to risk their entire Promote/Business just to assure that 1 Fighter wins it is kinda ridiculous honestly

[Cypocryphy]

Because as Roger Mayweather said, "Most people don't know shxt about boxing"

Haney outlanded or tied with Lomachenko in 7 of the 12 rounds.

That's enough to win.

The only OBJECTIVE criteria, the stats say that there's an argument for Devin as the winner.

People's SUBJECTIVE criterias say "Lomachenko won 10 rounds" and other shxt like that.

Fine, but that's YOUR OPINION, but the numbers say it was a CLOSE FIGHT that could've gone either way

Are you telling me this because you want me to believe what you're saying so you can feel better about Haney losing nearly every damn round of that fight? lmao. Bro. You're wasting your time. You know damn will that Haney got his ass kicked. He did not outland Loma. Only in your wildest fantasies did Haney outland Loma. It's all on tape bro, so don't bother trying to gaslight anyone into believing your nonsense.

Devin Haney Lost BADLY--Alhumdulillah

LOMA--WIN CLEARLY

It's that simple. And the whole world knows it.

[TheOneAboveAll]

The problem is people not understanding the scoring system. Actually, the system bolsters your argument for clean, hard punching. The problem is you are giving credence to viewpoints of those who dksab. Would you give any serious consideration to anyone saying a dunk doesn't count for the say 2 points as a 10 ft shot? No you wouldn't because dems da rules. No fight is ever won SOELY on ring generalship, defense or effective aggression. They are ancillary to clean, hard punching. Both fighter land 10 punches in a round. One guy had to throw 30 to land 10. The second guy landed 10 out 10. He either slipped or blocked the first fighter's missed 20 punches. Who won that round?

Precisely. Great example. The confusion is created by giving consideration to nonsense criteria and losing sight of the only important one - clean punching. You are making my same point. Not sure if you read the original post.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Damage, needs to also taken into consideration. Knock downs, and damaged sustained.

This is why? I have never ever rated Fury vs Wilder I, as a Fury win.

Tyson Fury did not beat Deontay Wilder. Wilder backed Tyson Fury up all night, and decked him twice 'Once badly'.

If two men where having a fight on the street, and one man decks the other fighter twice 'Once extremely badly, where all of his mates are ready to step in and stop the fight'.

The guy in Wilder's position walks away from that street fight, with everyone saying he won the fight.

Tyson Fury vs Deontay Wilder I, was ether a draw or a Deontay Wilder win if you want to give the win to one of the fighters 'But overall I personally think a draw was the correct decision'.

The reason why the draw was the correct decision, was because? Fury did fight a good fight from long-range for a large percentage of the fight, but he inflicted little damage on Wilder and was decked twice 'Once badly'. That is not how a fighter wins a World title, that has never been the way 'The fight was a draw' etc.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Even rounds are for people who can't make decisions, never score em.

Scoring is still better than it was in the 60's and before, where refs could score fights etc....Floyd Patterson vs Jimmy Ellis.

That’s not true. Some rounds are so close they basically come down to a coin flip in the scorer’s mind. Happens all the time. They’re what we call “swing rounds”; and they often have a negative impact on a decision and the ensuing reaction. I’m not saying who won between Haney and Lomachenko (I haven’t even seen the fight yet), but it’s clear most thought there were several swing rounds. Those very rounds apparently determined the controversial outcome of this bout.

[CubanGuyNYC]

The problem is people not understanding the scoring system. Actually, the system bolsters your argument for clean, hard punching. The problem is you are giving credence to viewpoints of those who dksab. Would you give any serious consideration to anyone saying a dunk doesn't count for the say 2 points as a 10 ft shot? No you wouldn't because dems da rules. No fight is ever won SOELY on ring generalship, defense or effective aggression. They are ancillary to clean, hard punching. Both fighter land 10 punches in a round. One guy had to throw 30 to land 10. The second guy landed 10 out 10. He either slipped or blocked the first fighter's missed 20 punches. Who won that round?

This is an excellent example. I’ve made this exact point in the past. To use your scenario, just for kicks, I’d score the round for the more effective fighter — i.e. 10/10; the other guy was just flailing. Way, way too many fans give aggression too much credit. You’ve gotta land punches, dude.

[real raw]

Precisely. Great example. The confusion is created by giving consideration to nonsense criteria and losing sight of the only important one - clean punching. You are making my same point. Not sure if you read the original post.

I don't believe I am making your point. In the scenario BOTH fighters landed clean, punches, which is 10. What you say is nonsense criteria, I say is vital to determining who wins, the round/ fight, albeit secondary to clean punching.

Lets say the first guy lands 10, under the same scenario, but the second guy lands 8/8. Who win the round? Boxing isn't all about punching. Outside of an outright ko, or tko, there's other factors to consider. Not understanding the rules or misapplication of the judging criteria doesn't mean the system is flawed.

[SweetPbfAli]

Loma and his fans aside, the criteria for judging boxing is too subjective in nature to produce consistent results amongst a consensus.