Who knows better how to score a boxing match?

[Boxing_1013]

then you had your head up your ass..... in both fights

Do you not score the jab as a scoring punch? Genuine question. If not you must have some wild cards my friend lol.

As mentioned previously it is fair to argue who landed the best shots of a round...so a guy who gets outlanded could still have a case for winning a round/fight...but yeah it is not really debatable who landed more scoring shots in GGG Canelo...in both fights clearly GGG...that anyone would argue against that is strange

[Boxing_1013]

well..... NOT YOU SON !!

because you think that Golovkin won the rematch with Canelo

and yet..... Steve Weisfeld agreed with me.....




just saying

#learnthesport
#defencecounts
#steveweisfeldknowsmorethanaboutfkntime


b,b,b,b,but.....

I'm just informing you of what a top boxing official said is the criteria they use to score fights my friend...as he mentioned...they use the other things you cite, however only insofar as they help a fighter get off his offense...this is boxing, this is about landing punches on your opponent my friend...that's all it is - who is doing that better...

Debating the merits of a scorecard in a Canelo fight (not to single him out...many 'home' fighters fall into the same category generally)...I mean lol..we all know how that stuff goes.

As mentioned previously a guy can get outlanded in a round and still win it based on his fewer punches being better...Canelo I think had a few rounds like that, probably exclusively in fight 2...but yeah Canelo is the cash king in boxing right now so to beat him you've got to KO him probably...no real issue with it...he is a great fighter as well...no hate for him at all...but both fights were straightforward wins for GGG and not that debatable really to me...when you are continually outlanding your opponent round in and round out...good things usually happen for you and you win most of those rounds...

.

[Boxing_1013]

I don't score fights. Watching their fights, I had Canelo winning both fights.

Serious question man? How can you have an opinion on who wins
a fight if you don't score the fights...like kind of nullifies your opinion a bit

[Boxing_1013]

Everyone who posts regularly on here and actually watches fights is quite capable of scoring a round and a fight - hell, with just a very small amount of basic terminology and explanation an average guy of the street should be able to get the gist of it (and if we moved so far away from what the general public thinks about who won a fight that they can't then probably boxing needs to rethink it's scoring system), the dumbasses are the ones insisting that theirs is the 'only' way to score a fight...

Ultimately this shit is subjective and we all got our biases, whether those are for (or against) particular fighters or for aggressive punching styles or slippery evasive styles or whatever, and what folk don't seem to get is that our biases and preferences quite literally make us see different fights from one another - we'll notice different details and interpret the details we do notice in different ways... none of us is genuinely objective and the more emotionally invested we are in an outcome (win or lose) the less objective we inevitably are.

Vive la dfference I say - we got the judges' scores and they're ultimately the ones that matter for the official record, and we got our own judgement and that is the one we each need to use when determining how good we think a fighter is... neither can ultimately be proved right or wrong because this shit is subjective, they simply are what they are.

Good post man...but this is boxing...all it is is who is landing more and better punches...defense gets scored as a result of that anyway...fair to argue who is landing cleaner or better punches...but to potentially score other things like 'what type of trunks' a guy wears...I mean none of that is boxing lol...as Weisfeld said...all boxing is, and all judges look at, is who is landing more and better shots

[Boxing_1013]

NO..... that is absolutely incorrect

you need to link me to that..... ???

those other " factors " are legitimate scoring criteria

I agree with clean HARD punching being the primary criteria.....

but the latest casual-fan spin..... that defense, effective aggression, and ring generalship..... are not even considered unless the number of clean hard punches landed just so happens to be exactly the same..... is absolute rubbish

* clean hard punching
* effective aggression
* defence
* ring generalship

NOW, do you guys see how difficult judging a fight can be..... ?

NOW, do you see how/why judges can differ on their opinion... ?

Bro...my friend...my buddy...my pal...my guy...

Why are you lying? I always knew you to be an honorable guy man. A man who would tip his cap and admit defeat when proven wrong... many others, and myself, have shown you how judges judge fights, and how they incorporate those factors into judging. Here it is again bro, come on, be better than that bro:

You can also check my sig as a good reference as well my friend.

"A lot of times fans hear that judges focus on four categories: clean punches, effective aggressiveness, defense and ring generalship," Weisfeld said. "But based upon my own experience, my conversations with other judges and seminars conducted by top judges, judges really focus on one category, and that's clean punches."

Clean punches: To me, clean punches are the most important aspect, and the other factors are really tied to that. Take the phrase, "effective aggressiveness." How is a boxer effective? He's effective by landing clean punches. How about "defense?" A boxer shows great defense by not getting hit with clean punches. And, finally, the term "ring generalship." A boxer uses the ring to put himself in a position to land clean punches."

Steve Weisfeld

[M Bison]

I can't see how dodging or blocking a punch is worthy of scoring points, you score points by landing shots on your opponent. Its not rocket science like some try to make it out to be, in some rare circumstances you might want to factor in who is the aggressor when the fight is close, but being the aggressor whilst throwing less doesn't bode that well. You can plod forward all you want but when you're being outworked its not a good thing for you.

[Boxing_1013]

I can't see how dodging or blocking a punch is worthy of scoring points, you score points by landing shots on your opponent. Its not rocket science like some try to make it out to be, in some rare circumstances you might want to factor in who is the aggressor when the fight is close, but being the aggressor whilst throwing less doesn't bode that well. You can plod forward all you want but when you're being outworked its not a good thing for you.

Great post...should be simple enough to understand...I think some want to change the basic rules to try and justify their fighter winning a fight they didn't win...my 2 cents anyway

[aboutfkntime]

This thread was a response to Mr Time...with regards to how boxing matches are scored...as I referenced in my posts it is possible for a judge to disagree on rounds because even when one guy is clearly outlanding the other...the guy getting outlanded could land the better shot or shots.

Wilder Fury another good recent example of that. But yeah GGG clearly won both fights. Canelo is the cash king of boxing so judges will always rule in his favor. He brings a lot of money to the sport...and if he had 10 losses no one would care to watch him.. I don't really have a problem with it...money talks...

Was just making a thread to remind/educate my fellow boxing fans here that boxing judges only care about scoring punches landed and punch effectiveness...surprised that needed it's own thread honestly
..but yeah that's all boxing is - who is landing more and better punches...be well my friend.

so, Weisfeld was wrong then..... ?

[aboutfkntime]

Do you not score the jab as a scoring punch? Genuine question. If not you must have some wild cards my friend lol.

As mentioned previously it is fair to argue who landed the best shots of a round...so a guy who gets outlanded could still have a case for winning a round/fight...but yeah it is not really debatable who landed more scoring shots in GGG Canelo...in both fights clearly GGG...that anyone would argue against that is strange

I never said anything like that

I said.....

* clean hard punching
* effective aggression
* defence
* ring generalship

so, was Weisfeld WRONG when he awarded the rematch to Canelo?

yes..... or no..... ?

[Boxing_1013]

so, Weisfeld was wrong then..... ?

Read my next line in that post my buddy lol