Number of Punches Determines a Winner?

[Tony Trick-Pony]

That's assumptive. It's not going to drop his punch output. Khan's body is not his weak spot; he can take them, Chino was laying them in and still lost.

Look, it's fine. You're basically saying that Paulie should be a first ballot HOF'er because of how many feather jabs he landed. Didn't matter if his head nearly got taken off by damn near everyone he was in the ring with; he landed more, that's all that should matter.



No. The current system is fine. We just need to fix the current fighters. If your name isn't Floyd Mayweather, don't leave it to the judges because it won't work.

Fix the current fighters? And how do we do that exactly? So I guess a guy like Paulie is actually out under your propsed system. He would never get the win because he gets his head taken off every time out? Don't recall that happening.

It's simple. When there is not a KO and often there will not be, you have to have an objective way for a guy to win a fight. Something to shoot for outside of impressing a judge. The numbers do this better than any judge.

And also, we've seen amatuer fights that are boring. Sure, but in twelve round fights, guys are going to do what they do. Even if you have a guy pitty-patting around, he still has to land more punches which is not easy by any means.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Fix the current fighters? And how do we do that exactly?

By incentivizing performance, like the UFC, and punishing guys who clearly show up for a check. And do it based on the real four judging criteria.

Ring Generalship = 25% bonus
Effective Defense = 25% bonus
Effective Aggression/Workrate = 25% bonus
Hard and Clean Punches (regardless of amount) = 25% bonus

In these, you pay that 25% by cutting the other guy's take. If the fighters know there's a threat to their livelihood, all of a sudden you'll start seeing all sorts of change in guys like Broner. Using that sort of model, it rewards Billy Juice for what was a masterful performance against Lemieux; it rewards Floyd for what was a masterful performance against Pacquiao; and it punishes Broner for just shaking his head and eating shots against Garcia.


A KO (not a TKO) is 100% bonus. RTD/quit, the guy forfeits the entire purse. Then you won't see guys quitting against Loma no more, guaranteed.

[Vasyl’s dad]

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."

“You must spread some reputation around....”.

These guys are flip floppers. Controlling the fight with a jab is only good when their guy does it. Landing more punches is only good when their guy does it. Body shots only count when their guy does it. And lets not forget the best one of all, “well he said he was going to do this and instead he.....”

[Vasyl’s dad]

Your post didn’t say anything about scoring. You just said saying he’s scared.

The thread is about scoring, you do realize that, right?

[LoadedWraps]

I 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?

Not all punches are equal, terrible idea.

Also, most scrubs on here don't know where to begin to score a fight, they just try to find a way to argue their fighter won. That's not a boxing problem that's an idiot problem, and we've had them around here forever.

I have a very specific way I score fights and don't deviate from this, I've explained it elsewhere.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

“You must spread some reputation around....”.

These guys are flip floppers. Controlling the fight with a jab is only good when their guy does it. Landing more punches is only good when their guy does it. Body shots only count when their guy does it. And lets not forget the best one of all, “well he said he was going to do this and instead he.....”

Yeah, man. You've got it. The only reason many wanted Canelo to win was because Floyd holds a W over him. That legacy doe.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Not all punches are equal, terrible idea.

Also, most scrubs on here don't know where to begin to score a fight, they just try to find a way to argue their fighter won. That's not a boxing problem that's an idiot problem, and we've had them around here forever.

I have a very specific way I score fights and don't deviate from this, I've explained it elsewhere.

Right. You have your way and everyone else has their way. No objective standard at all. Just a bunch of opinions as always. And the lousy decisions will continue...

Great idea.

[hugh grant]

But I think bad decisions will always happen so at least reveal scorecard after every round.
That way at least Ggg would know he was being robbed whilst it was happening rather than be in suspense until final round