What are you scoring in fights/boxing matches?

[Boxing_1013]

I ask this question sincerely...I am a bit stunned when some posters on here claim they actively score things such as defense, ring generalship, effective aggression.

I felt it was pretty obvious that the only things judges score, and that any of us should be scoring, in a fight is who is landing the better (more, cleaner, harder, more effective etc) punches.

Those other qualities mentioned are obviously important...but only as far as they allow you to 'score' on (or not be scored on by) your opponent.

A big problem that can exist when someone actively scores those other areas (imho) is it opens up a can of worms and really makes it possible for some judges (and some of us) to try and justify horrible cards and decisions.

A judge could say 'well fighter X was fighting his fight and made fighter Y fight a fight he didn't want to (ring general)...I felt he nullified the effective aggression of fighter Y...fighter X showed better defense in my opinion as well.'

But in that scenario, if fighter X lands 20 punches and misses 20, and fighter Y lands 5 punches and misses 3...and all the punches are basically the same effectiveness, well it is obvious that fighter X wins the round.

If you actively score the other criteria, it as much as anything becomes a serious opportunity to rig scorecards and justify terrible decisions/cards.

Not to mention that I feel it is pretty intuitive that when scoring a fight/boxing match, all that matters is who is doing the better scoring/damage/work...this holds as true for a pro boxing match, as it does for a street fight...that's all we are looking to judge when we are deciding the winner.

I am of the belief that judges (or any of us) should rarely if ever differ by more than 2 rounds in any given fight...we may differ on if a round is very clear, or close but clear, or a 50/50 pick em round.

But in general we should agree within about 1 round of each other...most fights just aren't that hard to score...you more or less split the too close to call rounds...and score the others, and them bam, there you go.

Imho 95% of fights have one clear winner...5% are the '7-5 either way' type of fights, where maybe you shade it one way but could see how someone else shades it another way...Floyd JLC 1 was this way for me...I shade it 7-5 to Floyd or could go with 6-6...but could see 7-5 JLC as well.

In any event, interested in hearing everyone's thoughts.

[Boxing_1013]

Great article for those who haven't seen it:

"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.

So let's focus on the phrase "clean punches." It may not be initially apparent, but there are various elements included within that phrase. First, there's the number of punches. The boxer who lands more punches generally wins. However, harder punches count more than lighter punches.

Now, there's no mathematical formula that equates the number of punches with the hardness of the punch. The judge has to weigh the two based on his experience. But more important than the number of punches or the hardness of the punch is the effect of the punch. For example, a seemingly lighter punch that causes a boxer to stagger is scored higher than a seemingly harder punch that has no effect.

Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense. Most judges that I have spoken to do not give credit for defense alone. If a boxer has a good defense, it means that he is not being hit with punches. But let's remember the purpose of the sport: to land punches on your opponent.

If Boxer A throws 10 punches in a round, but lands none of them, and Boxer B lands zero and throws zero, you still have an even round with no punches landing. You don't want to create a disincentive for a boxer to land punches if he thinks he's going to be penalized for missing."

https://www.premierboxingchampions.c...ow-score-fight

[Spray_resistant]

Clean effective punches, this means harder punchers are favored in scoring based on the criteria since harder punches are more effective than softer ones.

I'm tried of people making up their own criteria ex. He was busier, he was coming forward more, look how ****** up so and so was at the end of 12.

[KingHippo]

I score all of it and my cards are usually close to at least one judge. Most people don't value defense, or just can't see it.

[TonyGe]

Personally I look at who is landing more first. I look at the exchanges and try to get a sense of who won. I look at the effect of the punches and what the punches are accomplishing. Are the punches backing the other man off hurting him or establishing a senario where he is in a better strategic position.
Punches can also be used as defense. I've seen numerous fighters using jabs to keep the other man distracted and blunt his attack. So if they miss but the other man doesn't come forward are they counted as missed punches or part of the fighters defense. I say defense if they establish a pattern of keeping the other man at bay when you don't want to get into an exchange in order to regroup. There are many ways to interpret what is happening but I give more weight to who scores more and the effect of the punches. What made Marvin Hagler so great was more often than not he was the man finishing each exchange.

[Spray_resistant]

I score all of it and my cards are usually close to at least one judge. Most people don't value defense, or just can't see it.

I mean if no clean punches are landed in a rd I can see going to the other 3 very distant go to's but you can't honestly be thinking......well yeah fighter A landed more clean effective punches but fighter B also slipped alot of punches and darted away avoiding being trapped in a corner.......decisions decisions????

[turnedup]

There are fundamental ways of scoring a fight but even then people end up seeing fights differently based on stylistic preferences they have. Someone who enjoys brawls isn’t going to score the same as a fan of technicians

[Boxing_1013]

Clean effective punches, this means harder punchers are favored in scoring based on the criteria since harder punches are more effective than softer ones.

I'm tried of people making up their own criteria ex. He was busier, he was coming forward more, look how ****** up so and so was at the end of 12.

Thanks...good post

I score all of it and my cards are usually close to at least one judge. Most people don't value defense, or just can't see it.

Bro...saying your cards are usually close to at least one judge...I mean come on man.

Defense is definitely important...but you don't actively score it...it is important because if you have good defense, you are taking away from your opponent's ability to score on you.

If you actively give points for defense, you are basically scoring it twice.

Read the bold part of Tony's post below as well...it is a great point that for some fighters, their offense could be a form of defense...if my throwing nullifies you throwing on me, or even attempting to score, well my defense is pretty good isn't it?

I mean if no clean punches are landed in a rd I can see going to the other 3 very distant go to's but you can't honestly be thinking......well yeah fighter A landed more clean effective punches but fighter B also slipped alot of punches and darted away avoiding being trapped in a corner.......decisions decisions????

Thanks...said that better than I could have...

Personally I look at who is landing more first. I look at the exchanges and try to get a sense of who won. I look at the effect of the punches and what the punches are accomplishing. Are the punches backing the other man off hurting him or establishing a senario where he is in a better strategic position.
Punches can also be used as defense. I've seen numerous fighters using jabs to keep the other man distracted and blunt his attack. So if they miss but the other man doesn't come forward are they counted as missed punches or part of the fighters defense. I say defense if they establish a pattern of keeping the other man at bay when you don't want to get into an exchange in order to regroup. There are many ways to interpret what is happening but I give more weight to scores more and the effect of the punches. What made Marvin Hagler so great was more often than not he was the man finishing each exchange.

[Boxing_1013]

There are fundamental ways of scoring a fight but even then people end up seeing fights differently based on stylistic preferences they have. Someone who enjoys brawls isn’t going to score the same as a fan of technicians

Right but in any fight...all we are looking at is who is doing more damage really...who is landing more, better, cleaner, harder shots...who is landing more effectively.

I think reasonable people can differ as to how effective they feel certain punches are...and that could turn a couple close rounds to clear in a fight, or vice versa.

But you have to score a brawl the same as a technical fight...score some of GGG's fights the same as Floyd's...who is doing the better, more effective work in there...who is landing the better, more damaging punches.

I really can't believe that real boxing fans are out there actively scoring anything other than the punches landed and their effectiveness.

[TonyGe]

Establish the jab. Everyone on this board have heard trainers say that to their fighter. Larry Holmes was a prime example how a fighter can use his jab to seize control of a fight not going the way he wanted. Compubox did a dirty when they broke jabs off and segregated them from the other punches in a fighter's arsenal.