The surprise factor in scoring.

[Oh you out son]

I guess the same could be said when you go into a fight just caring about YOUR fighter and don't have eyes/care for what the other guy is doing.

I think the scenario you mentioned could be applied to a fight where it's real close. But I didn't see anyone saying "Herrera won" cause he did better than people expected and was the underdog. And that fight vs Alvarado was WAYYYY closer than Rios vs Abril. True story.

Ya I agree with everything you said. If a big fight was close and people thought it was a robbery, what I do is re-watch it twice. The first time I watch only one fighter. I watch all his offense/defense. Than I watch it again only watching the other fighter.

Doing this and comparing what you have seen is a good way I think to score.

For Pac-JMM 3, when i first watched it I didn't score it cause I was just enjoying watching (without scoring it though I felt JMM won by a lot, prolly part of this due to fact I didn't expect it like the TS was suggesting). But then when I watched it again twice and scored. I had it 115-113 JMM. So at first when I heard people saying it could have been a draw I thought no chance, but now I can understand

[LA_2_Vegas]

This is a good topic because many of these small factors contribute to the frustrations that many fans have with the sport.

just to expand on the small factors that affect scoring: How many people think that accurately scoring boxing requires somewhat of a 'trained eye'?

I hate to admit that I think it does because it marginalizes new and casual fans who like boxing, but are confused by some of its procedures.

I mean how long do you have to watch fights to adjust your eye to the speed, pace, and volume of these guys? When I ask casual fan if they pay attention to one guy or both in a fight, they almost always say they can only focus on one fighter at any given time. To me, only being able to focus your attention on one fighter or the other will effect your scoring.

How much history do you have to know about how decisions are typically rendered in the sport, for example in Vegas, where we all know aggression and the guy advancing forward are highly valued.

All things being completely equal in any given fight ...the guy who will ultimately be given the decision, usually, will be the one who was coming forward. Seeing Rios get more love on the cards against Abril was not surprising at all - not because the fix was in, but because he was the one coming forward creating the action. Not saying I agree or that there is a conspiracy, it's just a part of the conventions of boxing to give more value to the guy coming forward.

So you have one guy scoring a fight influenced by the surprise factor, one guy influenced by the aggression of Rios, and one guy who has the balance of the fight on his card.

You can barely get 3 grown men to agree that the sky is blue on a sunny day, so why should I think there will ever be an agreement on scoring fights.

[Elie]

When I was scoring MArquez-Pacquio 3 I thought I m ight be giving Marquez more points than he deserved because I was surprised he was doing so well.

[Danny Gunz]

It absolutely plays a factor.

In a supposed mismatch when people watch the fight they expect the one guy to manhandle the other, when the other fighter puts up more of a fight than expected the initial reaction will either be the underdog is doing better than I thought he would, or the favorite isn't doing so well.

[ellobo]

I don't think the surprise factor would have an effect on my scorecard because I am very methodical and carefully score each round as it happens. I think lots of fans and some judges do give more credit than they should to the underdog who does better than expected. The Pac vs. Marquez fight #3 and the Maidana vs Morales fight are two examples of the underdog getting extra credit because of the surprise factor in my opinion. The Hopkins vs. De La Hoya and the Vargas vs. Wright fights are two more examples as you pointed out.

I think this happens a lot. It's a perception of a fighter doing well when really they are just doing better than expected.

The flip side to that is giving too much credit to a fighter for their reputation and record, I think that happened to a lot of fans watching the Pacquiao vs Marquez fights.