It's the Scoring System

[-Kev-]

more crying and biching from people that made out their scorecard before the fight started. Ya boy lost and yall still crying 2 days later. no robbery. stop the bullchit

Here’s the Haney cum guzzler still working OT.

You don’t like the discussions that are taking place, which consists of over 95% of active NSB members. So instead of logging in here to show your undying love for Devin Haney’s balls, why not stay away from the forum until the discussions cool down?

Adults are clearly discussing this travesty of a decision, you are clearly in the minority, that should say something about yourself and boxing: YDKSAB.

[Lupara]

The simplest fix is to let them fight until one says they can't any longer

[just the facts]

Good post. But what happens when 80 percent of the population (or viewers) see the winner clear as day. If this were a toss up fight that we just saw this weekend, wouldn't there be a big split of opinion? Why is it so overwhelmingly Loma? Why are all the professional fighters and trainers saying Loma won? Why are they ALL SAYING IT'S A ROBBERY?!

I've never seen such an outpouring of outrage. I don't even think it was this bad for Canelo vs Golovkin. I think this is viewed as being even more outrageous. Maybe it's due to Canelo vs Golovkin ended in a majority draw. I don't know, but this weekend has left EVERYONE OUTRAGED. So clearly there is some objective criteria that is being considered here to have people overwhelmingly saying the fight was a robbery and Loma won the fight.

Sour g****s!!!!!

[sargo]

Completely agree not to force the 10-9. If it is a draw, score it 10-10. Have mentioned this myself years ago.

And agree with the vague criteria. So is running or excessive holding ring generalship?

[sargo]

Here’s the Haney cum guzzler still working OT.

You don’t like the discussions that are taking place, which consists of over 95% of active NSB members. So instead of logging in here to show your undying love for Devin Haney’s balls, why not stay away from the forum until the discussions cool down?

Adults are clearly discussing this travesty of a decision, you are clearly in the minority, that should say something about yourself and boxing: YDKSAB.

Makes you wonder if these guys are paid to post here.

[BoxingParadigm]

Yes, there is corruption in boxing. Yes, there are incompetent judges and referees. This is irrefutable, but why do so many fans in 2023 still overlook the most obvious reason why professional boxing gets it wrong so regularly? Boxing decisions are consistently controversial not (primarily) because of inept judges or crooked power brokers, but simply because of pro boxing's vague and non-sensical rules and judging criteria.

Within the U.S. the Unified Rules of the Association of Boxing Commissions is about the most authoriative source for information about how to conduct and score a professional boxing match, but this resource doesn't come close to offering a comprehensive guide to evaluating a fight. The Unified Rules of Boxing Commissions provides a general framework for scoring but doesn't even include a detailed breakdown of the scoring system and judging critiera. Fans need to go elsewhere for this information. Anyone who has watched fights for more than a week, however, has heard that boxing scoring uses the 10-Point Must system and that judges evaluate fights on the following four (4) criteria.

• Effective Aggression
• Ring Generalship
• Defense
• Clean, Hard Punching

Most fans accept these as valid scoring criteria, but they are in fact, one of two principle culprits of why judges' and fans' scores vary so wildly in almost every major fight. A newbie fan might immediately wonder how could there be 4 scoring criteria? What other sport does that? Are these criteria all weighted the same? Is there any priority among them? Who's to know?

In reality, the only logical scoring criterion is Clean, Hard Punching. The other criteria are superfluous and incidental to Clean, Hard Punching. These extra criteria also create the most confusion and lead to wacky scoring because they allow fans to pick and choose which criterion they want to prioritize in any given fight. If they are a Floyd fan, they probably prioritize Defense and Ring Generaliship (whatever that specifically means). In another fight they might justify their scores by citing punch stats which indicate that their guy threw more punches or landed at a higher percentage (as though either matter); thereby proving that he was more 'effectively aggressive.' This is inanity, of course. Nothing matters in this this sport more than clean, hard punching, and weighing any other competing criteria only serves to disregard and diminish the primacy of clean, hard punching. Imagine if similar criteria were applied to any other sports (football, tennis, basketball, etc). You don't win in any competitive sport by giving points for defense, effort or style, so why impose those critieria on the most serious sport of all? This is not dancing or gymnastics.

The second (and possibly bigger) culprit for crazy scoring in boxing is the complete disregard for even rounds. A majority of fans and judges completely disregard the fact that the 10-Point Must system acknowledges and allows for scoring of evenly-contested rounds; either because they do not know the rules or they simply regard it as weak and indecisive to score a round even. Fans and judges alike are so loathe to scoring even rounds that they will force a 10-9 score and justify it with the most insgnificant punch or cite some vague assessment of superiority in aggressiveness or ring generalship. Anything not to score an even round, even when the round was absolutely as even or uneventful as can be. The end result is wild scorecard variance and endless calls of robbery, just like this weekend.

Most fans, regardless of who they were rooting for this weekend, acknowledged that there were at least 5-6 extremely difficult "swing rounds" to score in the Haney-Lomachenko fight. How many of those fans scored 5-6 even rounds (10-10) on their scorecards. Imagine if they did?

Great points. There's also huge misconceptions with the general public on how to score boxing fights. And while I also think Lomachenko won, I can't bring myself to say it was a robbery. That was a very difficult fight to score and I could see some people having it 115-113 for Haney. I'm just a little amazed that two of those people were official judges for the fight and the third completely missed the boat scoring it 116-112.

[Jsmooth9876]

They need to get rid of these old ass judges first. Also there’s no need for them to be ringside either. It’s 2023 and they should be watching the fights on an HD TV monitor. Sometimes I look at the judges during the rounds and watching them try to lean over and get a decent vantage point with the referee in the way is embarrassing. They’re missing all kinds of action in the ring.

This is what I have been saying for years. How can you have people judging a fight when they can't even see the action clearly. I have sat ringside at fights and the seats suck compared to being slightly elevated over the rope height where you can see everything clearly. They should be in a back room with no commentary and other officials watching them so there's no funny business between them.

[sargo]

Also stop the "unofficial score card" shown live. Heavily influences the way viewers see the fight. Started watching the fight in the 4th round. Thought Haney did so well in the first 2 rounds like Lopez did because of the live score card. Surprised how well Lomachenko actually did and was moving forward.

[buddyr]

Makes you wonder if these guys are paid to post here.

i can take it just as I can dish it. You mfers can't take what you dish out. That's the funny part. keep crying puzzy. Your boy lost

[Pac=Duran]

Yes, there is corruption in boxing. Yes, there are incompetent judges and referees. This is irrefutable, but why do so many fans in 2023 still overlook the most obvious reason why professional boxing gets it wrong so regularly? Boxing decisions are consistently controversial not (primarily) because of inept judges or crooked power brokers, but simply because of pro boxing's vague and non-sensical rules and judging criteria.

Within the U.S. the Unified Rules of the Association of Boxing Commissions is about the most authoriative source for information about how to conduct and score a professional boxing match, but this resource doesn't come close to offering a comprehensive guide to evaluating a fight. The Unified Rules of Boxing Commissions provides a general framework for scoring but doesn't even include a detailed breakdown of the scoring system and judging critiera. Fans need to go elsewhere for this information. Anyone who has watched fights for more than a week, however, has heard that boxing scoring uses the 10-Point Must system and that judges evaluate fights on the following four (4) criteria.

• Effective Aggression
• Ring Generalship
• Defense
• Clean, Hard Punching

Most fans accept these as valid scoring criteria, but they are in fact, one of two principle culprits of why judges' and fans' scores vary so wildly in almost every major fight. A newbie fan might immediately wonder how could there be 4 scoring criteria? What other sport does that? Are these criteria all weighted the same? Is there any priority among them? Who's to know?

In reality, the only logical scoring criterion is Clean, Hard Punching. The other criteria are superfluous and incidental to Clean, Hard Punching. These extra criteria also create the most confusion and lead to wacky scoring because they allow fans to pick and choose which criterion they want to prioritize in any given fight. If they are a Floyd fan, they probably prioritize Defense and Ring Generaliship (whatever that specifically means). In another fight they might justify their scores by citing punch stats which indicate that their guy threw more punches or landed at a higher percentage (as though either matter); thereby proving that he was more 'effectively aggressive.' This is inanity, of course. Nothing matters in this this sport more than clean, hard punching, and weighing any other competing criteria only serves to disregard and diminish the primacy of clean, hard punching. Imagine if similar criteria were applied to any other sports (football, tennis, basketball, etc). You don't win in any competitive sport by giving points for defense, effort or style, so why impose those critieria on the most serious sport of all? This is not dancing or gymnastics.

The second (and possibly bigger) culprit for crazy scoring in boxing is the complete disregard for even rounds. A majority of fans and judges completely disregard the fact that the 10-Point Must system acknowledges and allows for scoring of evenly-contested rounds; either because they do not know the rules or they simply regard it as weak and indecisive to score a round even. Fans and judges alike are so loathe to scoring even rounds that they will force a 10-9 score and justify it with the most insgnificant punch or cite some vague assessment of superiority in aggressiveness or ring generalship. Anything not to score an even round, even when the round was absolutely as even or uneventful as can be. The end result is wild scorecard variance and endless calls of robbery, just like this weekend.

Most fans, regardless of who they were rooting for this weekend, acknowledged that there were at least 5-6 extremely difficult "swing rounds" to score in the Haney-Lomachenko fight. How many of those fans scored 5-6 even rounds (10-10) on their scorecards. Imagine if they did?

It’s a bit messed up yeah.

even if you say Haney won 7 rounds, it’s difficult to argue that he “won” the fight if he got his **** pushed in and lit up for the other 5