Number of Punches Determines a Winner?

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Would be like deciding a baseball game by the number of times a team hit the ball with the bat or a basketball game by number of shots taken. Compubox is a sanity check at best.

Or by number of points scored?

What a novel idea.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Doesn't land anywhere near 20.

If a punch lands or not is an opinion. Nothing punches that maybe/maybe not land can win fights. Did counting punches stop corruption in the amateurs?

Actually it's not. Some punches are suspect, but my God, Marquez landing that shot on Pac is an opinion? I think not. And with replays, these things become very clear. Obviously you want to keep the same lame ass opinion system. What surprises me the most is not the crooked ass promoters wanting to get away with this but how many fans cheer it on as well. Maybe you like the drama of controversy instead of results. I don't know. Pretty sick though.

[HanzGruber]

Or by number of points scored?

What a novel idea.

No cause In basketball 2 points is 2 points.

In boxing all punches are not and should not be equal

[Vasyl’s dad]

No cause In basketball 2 points is 2 points.

In boxing all punches are not and should not be equal

Right. When a fighter like Winky Wright uses a jab to control a fight, hes called a smart winner using boxing tactics. When a fighter like Golovkin uses a jab, hes called scared.

[HanzGruber]

Right. When a fighter like Winky Wright uses a jab to control a fight, hes called a smart winner using boxing tactics. When a fighter like Golovkin uses a jab, hes called scared.

That’s what happens when you tell the other guy to fight like a man and end up backing up most of the fight

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Right. When a fighter like Winky Wright uses a jab to control a fight, hes called a smart winner using boxing tactics. When a fighter like Golovkin uses a jab, hes called scared.

You've got it, man.

"Hit and not get hit."

Well, for some fighters. Not for others.

Hit and no get hit. Makes sense. Why not let the number of punches determine the winner? In other words, who hits the most and gets hit the least?

NOOOOOO!! NEVER!!! WE'VE GOT EXCUSES! OPINIONS ARE BETTER AND NOT CORRUPT!

Next week, "Man, that was a terrible decision. Something needs to change."

[Tony Trick-Pony]

No cause In basketball 2 points is 2 points.

In boxing all punches are not and should not be equal

Hhmm. Maybe all points in basketball shouldn't be equal either. Maybe we should take into consideration the adversity each player had to go through to land that particular shot. Maybe guy A gets a clear shot with no adversity for 2 points. Ah, but guy B had to get around like five guys and all kinds of blocks to land. So let's give him 4 points for that. Could be a bit confusing...

I think when you get hung up on abstractions like how much damage each punch does, it's a futile pursuit. All punches are not the same but if one guy lands more and there's no knockout, it sounds fair to me. It can be measured and even disputed in court in replays. What do we have now? Opinons, supposedly based on criteria but not really. Highly corrupt.

[ruedboy]

The only fair ending in boxing is the KO.
The fight continues until a fighter is KO'd or quits.
I'm joking but my method would do away with judges and how good is that?

[Marchegiano]

I'm a pretty big fan of posture and position myself.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Hit and no get hit. Makes sense. Why not let the number of punches determine the winner? In other words, who hits the most and gets hit the least?

Sure. So if someone like Floyd is pumping the jab in someone like Manny's face all night long for a 35% connect rate, while someone like Manny is flailing and missing punches all night long for a 19% connect rate, that's pretty decisive, right?

I mean, by that methodology, it wouldn't matter how effective Manny happened to be in a single round. Which would make slo-mo videos useless. It's all about the final score...right?