You weigh punches landed vs damage dealt.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Number of Punches Determines a Winner?
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by bigdunny1 View PostGGG loses so now we have to change entire criteria for scoring in boxing to help him and his cry baby fans? Went from killer who Kos everyone from 154-168 to now getting beat up by smaller canelo so let's make a rule that weak jabs count more then power punches LMAO
next rule is GGG is allowed to wear head gear like amatuers because it's not fair canelo allowed to phuk his face up? canelo really stole his fans souls
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tony Trick-Pony View PostI think the biggest problem with the sport is that there is no real objective way to score a fight. It's all subjective and often in the end, like this weekend, divisive.
So why not let the number of punches scored win rounds and ultimately the fight itself?
Obviously extra points should be awarded for knockdowns and punch numbers should be lowered when deductions occur but at least, you could say guy A won because he outlanded guy B.
I think this might be harder to argue with than the old "I believe he won the fight" line.
What do you guys think?
Yay or nay?
Comment
-
All things being equal then it's punches landed.
Unless your punches have the other opponent hurt visibly every time you land. Though not necessarily because your punches look harder
Comment
-
Originally posted by DARKSEID View PostI have good eyes. I know which punches land and which punches don't based on their trajectory and impact. The people that have bad eyes or haven't been watching boxing long get the rounds wrong. I don't. Especially on the replay. When i see the replay, I know 100% which round goes to who because i can zero in or slow down the bad angles.
You keep on writing essays confirming my point when i said my point in one sentence and it still stands.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Koba-Grozny View PostAh whatever, man. All you're telling me is that you're sure that your opinion is right. Problem is everyone else thinks that theirs is right too, cos, like, that's what an opinion is. Now - if you can somehow objectively prove to me that yours is better than everyone else's (ie that you are some kind of omniscent superbeing) then I will offer my humble apologies and start praying that you don't smite me with lightening bolts, but until then I'll be sticking with my initial comment that you're either hubristic or delusional (or both).
Comment
-
Get youger judges would be a good start. Why are they still using the same old geezers time and time again?
Decisions are left in the eyes of people who are in their 70s.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DARKSEID View PostThere's no problem here. The problem is you don't know how to score a fight and you're wasting my time with your idiotic semantics.
Comment
-
Comment