How do you rank and weight the 4 criteria for scoring/judging boxing matches?

[smoothsmg]

Exactly right, defense is also based off of offense. You can make a guy miss 200 punches a round but if he lands more and better clean punches then he wins the round and also has the better defense.

Same with ring generalship, the guy with the best ring generalship is the guy who sets himself up to land the best punches. You cannot possibly win a fight on defense and ring generalship

But you could possibly win rounds based off defense and ring generalship, which I believe Hopkins did on Saturday

[Russian Crushin]

But you could possibly win rounds based off defense and ring generalship, which I believe Hopkins did on Saturday

No, its because he landed the cleaner better punches

But he did have better ring generalship and defense, all because he landed better punches. Landing the better punches is what made his defense and ring generalship superior. Better defense and RG come off of punches landed. How can you possibly have better defense or RG if the other guy is landed the better cleaner punches on you? You cant

[bojangles1987]

Clean punching matters far more than everything else. The only reason you should even consider the other criteria is if the two fighters are landing an equal amount of clean punches on each other.

[bojangles1987]

the other criteria are a means to an end.


you score the round for the more effective puncher.


who does more damage?

There's absolutely nothing to argue about this, either. Anyone who does has an agenda to try and justify a crap decision.

[mconstantine]

Based on responses, I've tweaked my weights.

I absolutely agree clean punches should be the overwhelming factor. This is the hurt business. To a prior point, the other 3 are means to an end (either landing clean punches, or avoiding taking them).

But again, I say many fights/rounds are given due to activity vs. actual clean punches.

Clean Punches are very clear cut.

Clean punch = A punch that lands flush on the torso or head. Punches caught on the arms or gloves don't score at all. The only subjectivity there should be with clean punches is the amount of damage.

One clean hook that snaps head back or staggers opponent > 2 clean and flushly landed arm punch jabs.

[The Big Dunn]

Based on responses, I've tweaked my weights.

I absolutely agree clean punches should be the overwhelming factor. This is the hurt business. To a prior point, the other 3 are means to an end (either landing clean punches, or avoiding taking them).

But again, I say many fights/rounds are given due to activity vs. actual clean punches.

Clean Punches are very clear cut.

Clean punch = A punch that lands flush on the torso or head. Punches caught on the arms or gloves don't score at all. The only subjectivity there should be with clean punches is the amount of damage.

One clean hook that snaps head back or staggers opponent > 2 clean and flushly landed arm punch jabs.

look at it the other way because thats where you get the most controversy here on NSB

one clean jab > power punch that is partially blocked.

Nowhere in the official rules is power being scored. Yet when you discuss fights posters almost always say well he was throwing power shots while the other guy was running and jabbing.

[#1Assassin]

1. clean effective punching
2. ring generalship
3. defense
4. effective aggression

[#1Assassin]

No, its because he landed the cleaner better punches

But he did have better ring generalship and defense, all because he landed better punches. Landing the better punches is what made his defense and ring generalship superior. Better defense and RG come off of punches landed. How can you possibly have better defense or RG if the other guy is landed the better cleaner punches on you? You cant

say you are landing about the same, but your opponent is throwing much more hence missing much more as well. so you are scoring the same with punches landed but you are outscoring him defensively.

add ring generalship to that, controlling when and where the punches are being thrown. staying off the ropes, turning him at will and putting his back against the ropes every now and then to land some of those clean shots of yours.

landing shots certainly makes it easier to have good defense and control the ring. but its not a necessity.

[Russian Crushin]

say you are landing about the same, but your opponent is throwing much more hence missing much more as well. so you are scoring the same with punches landed but you are outscoring him defensively.

If it's a razor close round then I can understand maybe picking a winner based on what you like more. Those kind of rounds are pick em rounds. Too many people penalize a boxer for missing instead of rewarding for landing

add ring generalship to that, controlling when and where the punches are being thrown. staying off the ropes, turning him at will and putting his back against the ropes every now and then to land some of those clean shots of yours.

ok but all of that doesn't matter if the other guy out lands you. The point of ring generalship is controlling the pace to set up to land your punches

landing shots certainly makes it easier to have good defense and control the ring. but its not a necessity.

Landing clean punches is what Boxing is about, how is it possible to have a better defense of the other guy is out landing you? How can you control the action if most of the landing action is from the other guy? The guy with tje better defense is the guy who has less clean punches landed on him. Too many people give massive credit to "boxers". I swear some people think you can win a fight without landing punches

[billeau2]

This is a tough question to answer here are some of my thoughts:

Olympic boxing is about clean punching alone....Is there more than just scoring punches when we look at a professional match?

Judges often cannot see all the punches anyway and determine how clean they are.

What about fighters like Sweet Pea? who outclass a guy with such greal defense?

I also think that in the days when a fight went 15 rounds it was better because: more fights did not go the distance (better to not have a decision), the fighters had to be able to show grace and presence of mind when truly taxed in the later rounds...meaning one could extrapolate an argument for more than clean punching

Whatever one believes boxing is more than the acumlation of punch stat numbers...