Comments Thread For: Sunny Edwards Explains That He'll Be Very Calculated in Bam Rodriguez Clash

[Cypocryphy]

You still don't get it. Only a simpleton would say "I hope the judges prefer punches too". There is a reason why we have controversial decisions and why it is a fact that judges prefer certain styles and score fights differently. It would be naive to think otherwise. Everyone has seen judges give rounds to a guy who was applying ineffective aggression just because he was coming forward - just as a boxer who won a round by showboating and giving the appearance of winning a round while clearly landing less effective and less punches than the opponent. Anyone who has followed boxing for years has heard commentators comment on what the judges may prefer such as aggression vs movement and countering. Everyone knows this! That is why it is NOT "that simple" as you claim - you should know this by now unless you are a newbie. There is no perfect science to scoring fights, there are guidelines/rules that are skewed by viewing angles, experience, bias, preferences, etc.

I think you took my comment the wrong way. Why'd you delete your last post anyway? If I recall, you said something to the effect that some judges prefer aggression and some prefer movement. And I said I hope they prefer punches.

My point initially was that I would hope that judges like punches more than just "aggression" and "movement" because this is "boxing" after all. That's all I said. If a guy is running around the ring, trying to hide from the other guy, and judges are giving him points for that, then that would definitely be messed up. I can't recall that ever happening but, hey, who knows. (Actually, I do recall a time that happened, which was the Adelaide Byrde score for the first Golovkin - Canelo fight, where she gave the rounds to Canelo for running, claiming he won based on his upper body movement and back-foot speed, which leads me to my next point.)

If you think that these judges are actually scoring some of these fights, then you are extremely naive. These judges might actually score a fight, but there are many times the winner is predetermined. These judges are not judges. Their job is not to judge. Their job is to make sure the right guy wins. That's why it looks as if some judges prefer this and some prefer that. These are just excuses to make people believe that some form of judging is going on when the reality is that the winner was predetermined. Judging is not highly technical or extremely difficult. Granted there are times it can be difficult when a round is close, but usually it's pretty clear who's landing the harder punches and more of them, and who's being the effective aggressor or the ring general. It's usually pretty clear, but even then, the other guy will win the round.

Like I said, the only reason why it seems complicated is due people trying to rationalize absurd decisions. But the reality is that the cards were already filled out before the fight ever happened.

[richardt]

I think you took my comment the wrong way. Why'd you delete your last post anyway? If I recall, you said something to the effect that some judges prefer aggression and some prefer movement. And I said I hope they prefer punches.

My point initially was that I would hope that judges like punches more than just "aggression" and "movement" because this is "boxing" after all. That's all I said. If a guy is running around the ring, trying to hide from the other guy, and judges are giving him points for that, then that would definitely be messed up. I can't recall that ever happening but, hey, who knows. (Actually, I do recall a time that happened, which was the Adelaide Byrde score for the first Golovkin - Canelo fight, where she gave the rounds to Canelo for running, claiming he won based on his upper body movement and back-foot speed, which leads me to my next point.)

If you think that these judges are actually scoring some of these fights, then you are extremely naive. These judges might actually score a fight, but there are many times the winner is predetermined. These judges are not judges. Their job is not to judge. Their job is to make sure the right guy wins. That's why it looks as if some judges prefer this and some prefer that. These are just excuses to make people believe that some form of judging is going on when the reality is that the winner was predetermined. Judging is not highly technical or extremely difficult. Granted there are times it can be difficult when a round is close, but usually it's pretty clear who's landing the harder punches and more of them, and who's being the effective aggressor or the ring general. It's usually pretty clear, but even then, the other guy will win the round.

Like I said, the only reason why it seems complicated is due people trying to rationalize absurd decisions. But the reality is that the cards were already filled out before the fight ever happened.

I never deleted my post. "Hoping the judges like punches more than aggression and movement" is as pie in the sky as it gets. Hoping and actuality are not umbilically synonymous. Some judges score fights, some judges already have the winner in their mind - no one I know of and not me believe otherwise and are not that naive.

My mentioning of judges favoring a certain style still stands as All Bernstein and others have mentioned the same. You have basically proved my point about what the judges are looking for or failing to see with your follow-up statements.

One of the most comment statements in boxing commentating for decades has been "What the judges are looking at/for" and "Judge so-and-so" clearly favors the aggressor or the mover" and the commentator then goes on to point out past judging by said judge as to the fights they favor a certain style in. Hope and actuality are two different things.

And this goes right back to what I was saying regarding if the Edwards / Rodriguez fight is close, judges can have completely different scores based in part by the style they prefer, with the addition of other biases and factors that are not entirely based on punches thrown and landed in a distance fight which even if there was is not a pure science or even math equation.

[Cypocryphy]

I never deleted my post. "Hoping the judges like punches more than aggression and movement" is as pie in the sky as it gets. Hoping and actuality are not umbilically synonymous. Some judges score fights, some judges already have the winner in their mind - no one I know of and not me believe otherwise and are not that naive.

My mentioning of judges favoring a certain style still stands as All Bernstein and others have mentioned the same. You have basically proved my point about what the judges are looking for or failing to see with your follow-up statements.

One of the most comment statements in boxing commentating for decades has been "What the judges are looking at/for" and "Judge so-and-so" clearly favors the aggressor or the mover" and the commentator then goes on to point out past judging by said judge as to the fights they favor a certain style in. Hope and actuality are two different things.

Adelaide Byrd: "Just clean, effective punches, that's how I determine who's winning the fight."

Adelaide Byrd: "Quantity usually outweighs quality"

Same woman who gave Canelo the score of 118-110 against Glovkin.

Like I said. Judges look at who's landing punches. Everything revolves around landing punches and avoiding punches. The other three criteria revolve around landing punches, because you can't be effective without landing punches. you're not being the ring general if you aren't putting yourself in a position to land punches, and if you're being defensive, you're avoiding punches. The great mistake is to believe that a fighter wins by some other way than landing punches. Don't fall for the BS my guy. If it seems as if the someone won by just having better movement or being aggressive, it's due to the cards already being filled out.

[richardt]

Adelaide Byrd: "Just clean, effective punches, that's how I determine who's winning the fight."

Adelaide Byrd: "Quantity usually outweighs quality"

Same woman who gave Canelo the score of 118-110 against Glovkin.

Like I said. Judges look at who's landing punches. Everything revolves around landing punches and avoiding punches. The other three criteria revolve around landing punches, because you can't be effective without landing punches. you're not being the ring general if you aren't putting yourself in a position to land punches, and if you're being defensive, you're avoiding punches. The great mistake is to believe that a fighter wins by some other way than landing punches. Don't fall for the BS my guy. If it seems as if the someone won by just having better movement or being aggressive, it's due to the cards already being filled out.

You are forgetting that if a round is close, one judge may score the round for one fighter and the other judge may score a fight for the other based on what they see or interpret. They are sitting on different sides of the ring and each one can miss something the other judge saw and vice-versa. Two competent judges can still see a different winner. On top of that, nothing changes the fact that just like Al Bernstein and others have pointed out that judges will prefer one style over the other. That is not debatable, especially not in a close fight and nothing you or anyone hopes for is going to change that.

The concern should be placed on when one fighter clearly dominates and is wronged by an incompetent, biased, or paid off judge. Example, one guy comes forward and lands one punch and misses another and the other guy moves back and lands one punch and misses another. In that sequence it should be a draw for that moment unless one guy lands the harder punch. But if there are enough similar sequences, that muddles everything and a judge can look at the first, middle, and last part of the round and score the round based on that. But the fact is, many judges prefer certain styles when a fight seems to be even and nothing is going to change that. I said that often in a fight where there is a puncher/aggressor vs a mover, there is going to be divergent scores. Nothing is going to change that either.

The best outcome is where Rodriguez either stops Edwards or Edwards boxes Rodriguez ears off and there is less controversy.

[Cypocryphy]

You are forgetting that if a round is close, one judge may score the round for one fighter and the other judge may score a fight for the other based on what they see or interpret. They are sitting on different sides of the ring and each one can miss something the other judge saw and vice-versa. Two competent judges can still see a different winner. On top of that, nothing changes the fact that just like Al Bernstein and others have pointed out that judges will prefer one style over the other. That is not debatable, especially not in a close fight and nothing you or anyone hopes for is going to change that.

The concern should be placed on when one fighter clearly dominates and is wronged by an incompetent, biased, or paid off judge. Example, one guy comes forward and lands one punch and misses another and the other guy moves back and lands one punch and misses another. In that sequence it should be a draw for that moment unless one guy lands the harder punch. But if there are enough similar sequences, that muddles everything and a judge can look at the first, middle, and last part of the round and score the round based on that. But the fact is, many judges prefer certain styles when a fight seems to be even and nothing is going to change that. I said that often in a fight where there is a puncher/aggressor vs a mover, there is going to be divergent scores. Nothing is going to change that either.

The best outcome is where Rodriguez either stops Edwards or Edwards boxes Rodriguez ears off and there is less controversy.

Yeah. I agree with everything you just said.

I wanted to post this reddit post that this guy did. Maybe he had a link in it. But he had made breakdown of some of the judges tendencies in scoring fights. I wish I could find it again. I was going to post it here. I don't know who the judges are in this fight, and that list was made awhile ago, but I thought it would be interesting nonetheless.

I have a sneaking su****ion that Bam is going to get every close decision in this fight, so Sunny will have to go above and beyond if he wants to win a round. If Arizona is anything like Texas, then Sunny will probably get screwed over if he deserves to win. I don't remember seeing too many fights in Arizona. I think the last fight I saw in Arizona was a Benavidez fight or maybe it was Oscar Valdez vs Conceicao. Yeah. it was that Valdez vs Robson fight. We remember how that fight went; how Robson was screwed over. I think Bam can stop him, but if he can't, it's a safe bet that he'll have his hand raised no matter what.