How is defense a scoring criteria?

[SOPH~ REP.]

defense is under rated all the best fighters has it.how would boxing be with no defense

[SCtrojansbaby]

Defense is not scored.

Landing 10 out of 100 punches is better then landing 9/9 punches of equal effectiveness. Now when you make you opponent miss a lot your fewer punches are can be more effective on a tired and worn down opponent but that should be determined on a fight by fight basis.

[CubanGuyNYC]

to me it should be 10 - 10...no puches landed,no one wins ....but if ends up being like this for the whole fight, or atleast for the majority of the fight, id give it to the one that's punching (even wildly), coz atleast he's tryin....

Most people would feel that way: "At least he's trying." But the guy applying his hard earned skills isn't trying? If it was so easy to duck, slip and deflect punches, a lot more fighters would have those skills. The fact is, very few do. A true defensive-style fighter doesn't throw fewer punches because he's afraid to. He chooses his moments, based on his opportunities.

[Spray_resistant]

defense is under rated all the best fighters has it.how would boxing be with no defense

Which is why I said in my OP that it was important, I just don't see it as a scoring criteria but rather tactics used to prevent your opponent from scoring and something used to lead to scoring opportunities.

[-Boxzilla-]

running and clinching is a defensive tactic ... but i dont consider it to be 'proper' defense. defense should be used to set up offense. running and holding should only be used when hurt and trying to survive. a clinch every once in awhile is ok but when its an obvious tactic it should be stopped by the refs immediately. hard warnings should be given much more often point deductions and disqualification's should be happening. its against the rules period. and it makes fights ugly and boring ...

[FeFist]

If someone is actually running chances are they won't have the round scored in their favour. If people are utilising their defence and ring movement to evade punches and pick their shots and they ( which is what a lot of people call running) and they are successful in pulling it off they should rightfully have the round scored in their favour.

[CubanGuyNYC]

Defense is not scored.

Landing 10 out of 100 punches is better then landing 9/9 punches of equal effectiveness. Now when you make you opponent miss a lot your fewer punches are can be more effective on a tired and worn down opponent but that should be determined on a fight by fight basis.

Mmm...I disagree with your assessment of this particular scenario. Effective aggression is the key term here. Missing exactly 90% of your punches shouldn't qualify as "effective" in anyone's book. But if you can make a man miss that many punches, while scoring all of your own, and landing only one less than your opponent, you should get the round. That's my opinion.

You have to weigh all the factors and apply them. That's the science and art of scoring. It's often not so easy.

[puga]

Most people would feel that way: "At least he's trying." But the guy applying his hard earned skills isn't trying? If it was so easy to duck, slip and deflect punches, a lot more fighters would have those skills. The fact is, very few do. A true defensive-style fighter doesn't throw fewer punches because he's afraid to. He chooses his moments, based on his opportunities.

no, to me no...that's just showboating...... the name of the game is hit and not get hit, not just " not get hit".....and i think it's obvious , a combination of both is best...

[GrandpaBernard]

HOw is defense not apart of judging? The rules clearly state that defense is apart of the judging criteria.

[Spray_resistant]

Mmm...I disagree with your assessment of this particular scenario. Effective aggression is the key term here. Missing exactly 90% of your punches shouldn't qualify as "effective" in anyone's book. But if you can make a man miss that many punches, while scoring all of your own, and landing only one less than your opponent, you should get the round. That's my opinion.

You have to weigh all the factors and apply them. That's the science and art of scoring. It's often not so easy.

Well we have to also weigh the effectiveness of all 19 punches landed by both fighters, as you said plenty of factors and we can't just can assume someone won a round based on punch stats which is why I hate when its always cited on here.