How to score a fight

[iamboxing]

A lot of people don't know how to score a fight properly this is becoming abundantly clear with the amount of close fights we've had recently and how people have been referring to damage done to a fighters face and punches landed according to compubox.

Both of these factors matter but are not determining factors in scoring a fight, I even read a post recently where someone claimed that defence doesn't count? it's a joke

A forum filled with hardcore boxing fans and no one knows how to score a fight? Damage inflicted is not considered in scoring a fight so saying look at his face means very little. What if a fighter lands one shot that causes a swollen eye and broken nose whilst oversize getting beaten up should he get the round?

or if a fighter throws 150 punches in one round and none in the following 2 is he ahead of his opponent who has thrown 40 punches around for three rounds? because after this three rounds one will have thrown 120 punches and the other 150. because as far as i'm concerned thats going to be 2-1 to the guy who has thrown less rounds overall.

Compubox is not relevant when scoring a fight because fights are not scored as a collective but round by round.

any way this is how a fight should be scored;

Clean punches: a punch that lands cleanly, not on gloves arms shoulders or illegal punches.

Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense.

Effective aggression/ Ring generalship: In the extremely rare case of a judge scoring a round otherwise even, the judge might side with the boxer who was the aggressor on the theory that he is trying to make the fight. However, the key is whether or not the aggression is "effective.” Is the boxer landing or just coming forward? The fighter who controls the pace of the fight may also earn points here

The 10-point must system of scoring: a good example of not understanding this system was Badou Jack this weekend, he kept repeating my knockdown was just a flash knockdown but I really hurt Degale. That doesn't matter it's still a 10-8 round how hurt a person was by the knockdown does not matter when scoring a round.

now if two fighters, fight and one wins six close rounds and the other dominates 6 rounds brutally the fight is still a draw.

If you have a problem with this that's fine but that's how a fight is scored full stop.

stop allowing emotions to influence your opinion on who won a fight saying I didn't score the fight round by round but I feel fighter A won is pointless (Literally) because boxing does not wok like that.

Also there is no residual scoring, so you can't say fighter A was dominant in the last round but neither did much this round so I'll score for fighter A each round is scored as if it were the first round of a fight.

and then you have to also allow for interpretation ineffective aggression is not the same as effective aggression.

Please stop calling close fights robberies.

This was informative. Thank you.

[techliam]

A few things to note as well:

10/10 (or 9/9) rounds are perfectly acceptable - they should be used more often in my opinion. Flipping a coin for rounds devalues the official decision (Ward/Kovalev being a prime example of a fight which would have much better been scored a draw)

Winning the 'rest of the round' after a KD does not make the round 9/8. If you touched the canvas, but your opponent didn't, you lost the round.
In cases where the opponent who wasn't KD was dominated to the point a 10/8 round would have been awarded, the round becomes 9/9 - as if each scored a knockdown.

In regards to defence - most judges do not score for defensive flashes throughout a round. Defence is quite simple - if you land the more effective shots than your opponent, your defence is better. Put it this way, a slick boxer could be dodging punches matrix-style for 2mins of the round, pitty pattying the opponent with ineffective (but semi landing) jabs. But the other boxer lands a bomb in the last minute. The slick boxer clearly doesn't have the better defence if a bomb was landed. Sometimes offence is the best type of defence and it's worth taking it into account.

Boxing isn't 'hit and not be hit' as the myth goes on here. You can out land your opponent, but still lose the round.

[nubianpiye]

This was informative. Thank you.

A few things to note as well:

10/10 (or 9/9) rounds are perfectly acceptable - they should be used more often in my opinion. Flipping a coin for rounds devalues the official decision (Ward/Kovalev being a prime example of a fight which would have much better been scored a draw)

Winning the 'rest of the round' after a KD does not make the round 9/8. If you touched the canvas, but your opponent didn't, you lost the round.
In cases where the opponent who wasn't KD was dominated to the point a 10/8 round would have been awarded, the round becomes 9/9 - as if each scored a knockdown.

In regards to defence - most judges do not score for defensive flashes throughout a round. Defence is quite simple - if you land the more effective shots than your opponent, your defence is better. Put it this way, a slick boxer could be dodging punches matrix-style for 2mins of the round, pitty pattying the opponent with ineffective (but semi landing) jabs. But the other boxer lands a bomb in the last minute. The slick boxer clearly doesn't have the better defence if a bomb was landed. Sometimes offence is the best type of defence and it's worth taking it into account.

Boxing isn't 'hit and not be hit' as the myth goes on here. You can out land your opponent, but still lose the round.

I mostly agree with this well written post but I don't think defence should be undervalued it's one of 4 essential criteria when scoring around, But you are right if you get caught by massive shots regardless of slipping some punches then your defence is not better.

However unless a knockdown is involved one punch should never be enough to win a round, you'd have to land multiple big punches.

[nubianpiye]

This was informative. Thank you.

you are welcome.

[asgarth]

Winning the 'rest of the round' after a KD does not make the round 9/8. If you touched the canvas, but your opponent didn't, you lost the round.
In cases where the opponent who wasn't KD was dominated to the point a 10/8 round would have been awarded, the round becomes 9/9 - as if each scored a knockdown.

Are you sure? I dont have a rulesbook, but ive seen some Lederman scorecards, where he would judge the round 10-9 instead of 10-8, if the guy who was knocked down, more or less clearly won the round.

[nubianpiye]

Are you sure? I dont have a rulesbook, but ive seen some Lederman scorecards, where he would judge the round 10-9 instead of 10-8, if the guy who was knocked down, more or less clearly won the round.

In these instances the judge has made a mistake, however different governing bodies have slightly different rules with the points system but not the judging criteria.

[HughJass]

How do you determine who wins the rounds

whoever ejaculates first

[REMOVE SHARK 55]

A lot of people don't know how to score a fight properly this is becoming abundantly clear with the amount of close fights we've had recently and how people have been referring to damage done to a fighters face and punches landed according to compubox.

Both of these factors matter but are not determining factors in scoring a fight, I even read a post recently where someone claimed that defence doesn't count? it's a joke

A forum filled with hardcore boxing fans and no one knows how to score a fight? Damage inflicted is not considered in scoring a fight so saying look at his face means very little. What if a fighter lands one shot that causes a swollen eye and broken nose whilst oversize getting beaten up should he get the round?

or if a fighter throws 150 punches in one round and none in the following 2 is he ahead of his opponent who has thrown 40 punches around for three rounds? because after this three rounds one will have thrown 120 punches and the other 150. because as far as i'm concerned thats going to be 2-1 to the guy who has thrown less rounds overall.

Compubox is not relevant when scoring a fight because fights are not scored as a collective but round by round.

any way this is how a fight should be scored;

Clean punches: a punch that lands cleanly, not on gloves arms shoulders or illegal punches.

Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense.

Effective aggression/ Ring generalship: In the extremely rare case of a judge scoring a round otherwise even, the judge might side with the boxer who was the aggressor on the theory that he is trying to make the fight. However, the key is whether or not the aggression is "effective.” Is the boxer landing or just coming forward? The fighter who controls the pace of the fight may also earn points here

The 10-point must system of scoring: a good example of not understanding this system was Badou Jack this weekend, he kept repeating my knockdown was just a flash knockdown but I really hurt Degale. That doesn't matter it's still a 10-8 round how hurt a person was by the knockdown does not matter when scoring a round.

now if two fighters, fight and one wins six close rounds and the other dominates 6 rounds brutally the fight is still a draw.

If you have a problem with this that's fine but that's how a fight is scored full stop.

stop allowing emotions to influence your opinion on who won a fight saying I didn't score the fight round by round but I feel fighter A won is pointless (Literally) because boxing does not wok like that.

Also there is no residual scoring, so you can't say fighter A was dominant in the last round but neither did much this round so I'll score for fighter A each round is scored as if it were the first round of a fight.

and then you have to also allow for interpretation ineffective aggression is not the same as effective aggression.

Please stop calling close fights robberies.

Good post, a lot of posters are emotionally invested in a fighter or agenda so they over exaggerate or downplay another fighter. Whatever suits the narrative of the day.

[nubianpiye]

Good post, a lot of posters are emotionally invested in a fighter or agenda so they over exaggerate or downplay another fighter. Whatever suits the narrative of the day.

Yeah I thought this was a boxing discussion forum but it's more of a playground sometimes.

People are uninterested in actually scoring so long as whatever ag bra they're pushing remains intact.

[koolkc107]

A lot of people don't know how to score a fight properly this is becoming abundantly clear with the amount of close fights we've had recently and how people have been referring to damage done to a fighters face and punches landed according to compubox.

Both of these factors matter but are not determining factors in scoring a fight, I even read a post recently where someone claimed that defence doesn't count? it's a joke

A forum filled with hardcore boxing fans and no one knows how to score a fight? Damage inflicted is not considered in scoring a fight so saying look at his face means very little. What if a fighter lands one shot that causes a swollen eye and broken nose whilst oversize getting beaten up should he get the round?

or if a fighter throws 150 punches in one round and none in the following 2 is he ahead of his opponent who has thrown 40 punches around for three rounds? because after this three rounds one will have thrown 120 punches and the other 150. because as far as i'm concerned thats going to be 2-1 to the guy who has thrown less rounds overall.

Compubox is not relevant when scoring a fight because fights are not scored as a collective but round by round.

any way this is how a fight should be scored;

Clean punches: a punch that lands cleanly, not on gloves arms shoulders or illegal punches.

Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense.

Effective aggression/ Ring generalship: In the extremely rare case of a judge scoring a round otherwise even, the judge might side with the boxer who was the aggressor on the theory that he is trying to make the fight. However, the key is whether or not the aggression is "effective.” Is the boxer landing or just coming forward? The fighter who controls the pace of the fight may also earn points here

The 10-point must system of scoring: a good example of not understanding this system was Badou Jack this weekend, he kept repeating my knockdown was just a flash knockdown but I really hurt Degale. That doesn't matter it's still a 10-8 round how hurt a person was by the knockdown does not matter when scoring a round.

now if two fighters, fight and one wins six close rounds and the other dominates 6 rounds brutally the fight is still a draw.

If you have a problem with this that's fine but that's how a fight is scored full stop.

stop allowing emotions to influence your opinion on who won a fight saying I didn't score the fight round by round but I feel fighter A won is pointless (Literally) because boxing does not wok like that.

Also there is no residual scoring, so you can't say fighter A was dominant in the last round but neither did much this round so I'll score for fighter A each round is scored as if it were the first round of a fight.

and then you have to also allow for interpretation ineffective aggression is not the same as effective aggression.

Please stop calling close fights robberies.

Good post.

I would only point out that Effective Aggression is its own scoring criteria as is Ring Generalship. Lumping them together might give the uninitiated the idea they are opposite sides of the same coin which they are not.

Also, I'd like to add something I heard Teddy Atlas say about how he scores an individual round. What he does is divide the 3 minutes into 3 separate segments, awarding each segment to one of the boxers. The fighter who wins 2 segments will usually win the round unless there is a KD by the winner of the one segment, or the one segment winner has a minute more dominant and damaging than the 2 segments by the other fighter. That doesn't mean one or two good punches in one of the minutes win a round for a guy being owned and kept at bay by constant jabs and counters the other 2 minutes and 15 seconds of the round. The work done in the one minute has to be significant enough to make the 2 minutes less relevant.