What are you scoring in fights/boxing matches?

[Toffee]

You know what winning a round looks like.

The criteria are just to allow the scorer to apply some common sense. ie if a guy is tip tapping and getting caught by good clean shots then he doesn't win the round.

This is the problem with the cries of outrage at every close decision and calls for scoring to be in line with criteria.

Eventually you'll take boxing down an objective scoring route and it will be dreadful.

[Boxing_1013]

You know what winning a round looks like.

The criteria are just to allow the scorer to apply some common sense. ie if a guy is tip tapping and getting caught by good clean shots then he doesn't win the round.

This is the problem with the cries of outrage at every close decision and calls for scoring to be in line with criteria.

Eventually you'll take boxing down an objective scoring route and it will be dreadful.

Fair enough, good post...I think overrating, or actively rating at all, the other criteria besides clean/hard punches is bad practice as well...it opens up the ability to give bad cards by muddying the waters in fights/rounds.

One guy could get outworked on the clean/hard punching...but a 'fan' of his could say he felt he was the effective aggressor, or nullified the other guy's aggression, that he was the ring general in that case, and that his defense was better...it's just silly to me and terrible for boxing to promote scoring like that.

[Boxing_1013]

Absolutely perfect.

Some dumb kid spits all this **** because he truly believes he knows what he’s talking about just keeps embarrassing himself...

And then the same night Rigo just goes out and proves exactly how you win fights when there’s so many rounds where he barely lands anything clean at all and wins the fight.

That timing was absolutely perfect. Lmfao...

You should ask him how he just scored the Rigo fight.

Lol I love when this stuff happens and these guys like the one guy who thinks he knows how to judge fights just looks absolutely foolish.

Btw I didn't watch the Rigo fight tonight...but I assume Rigo landed the cleaner/harder punches, and probably more of them...cleaner punches to be emphasized there.

I scored Lara-Hurd 7-5 to Lara...as Hurd's activity was often times smothered imho...and Lara was often times landing the cleaner/better/more effective work.

The Cubans often do this but because they are from Cuba and not the US they don't get as much credit as they deserve really...I love Lara but he pisses me off as well with his lack of activity at times...he pisses away rounds and makes rounds/fights closer than he should.

[daggum]

I scored it 8-4 to Floyd...easy win, only one winner...how did you score it?

Floyd landed more often and cleaner...I don't think there is really anything to debate on that one.

thats not what happened at all actually. he certainly didn't land cleaner i mean i have no idea how you can even say that. his punches were barely grazing pac, were making no or little impact, and he had absolutely no leverage on any of his punches. pac meanwhile was landing clean, flush, hard, and snapping floyds head around with leverage. floyd just couldn't get off anything effective and his distance was all wrong. i suggest you review the fight and focus on clean punches. pac landed the much better punches by far like not even close. i'm not sure how you can say floyd landed cleaner? where are you getting that from? we can post the round by rounds if you would like.

[daggum]

You know what winning a round looks like.

The criteria are just to allow the scorer to apply some common sense. ie if a guy is tip tapping and getting caught by good clean shots then he doesn't win the round.

This is the problem with the cries of outrage at every close decision and calls for scoring to be in line with criteria.

Eventually you'll take boxing down an objective scoring route and it will be dreadful.

yet you scored floyd's lil taps and grazes and not pacs clean flush shots that rocked floyds head around. i dont get it. i know most people scored it for floyd and saying pac deserved to win is looked at co-ck-eyed but if you review the fight pac was landing the much better punches. dont fall for peer pressure. ill giv you a little test. watch round 3. only one guy was landing flush hard punches cleanly that rocked his opponents head around. the other guy landed 2 grazing jabs. which guy is which? which guy deserves to win that round?well thats for you to find out. round 3 was a microcosm of the fight. if you can't get that round right(which the judges and most people dont) then there is no point.

[Boxing_1013]

thats not what happened at all actually. he certainly didn't land cleaner i mean i have no idea how you can even say that. his punches were barely grazing pac, were making no or little impact, and he had absolutely no leverage on any of his punches. pac meanwhile was landing clean, flush, hard, and snapping floyds head around with leverage. floyd just couldn't get off anything effective and his distance was all wrong. i suggest you review the fight and focus on clean punches. pac landed the much better punches by far like not even close. i'm not sure how you can say floyd landed cleaner? where are you getting that from? we can post the round by rounds if you would like.

I only watched it once...never had any interest in watching it again...maybe I will one day...didn't think it was very close...and I wanted Pac to win that fight as much as I've really ever wanted anyone to win a fight...because I felt Floyd 100% delayed that fight all that time to avoid Manny.

[daggum]

I only watched it once...never had any interest in watching it again...maybe I will one day...didn't think it was very close...and I wanted Pac to win that fight as much as I've really ever wanted anyone to win a fight...because I felt Floyd 100% delayed that fight all that time to avoid Manny.

well that explains it. i can understand someone watching it live and just falling in line with the status quo by saying well i guess floyd won not a lot happened but if you actually watch the punches and who was landing good shots it wasnt hard to see it was pac and not floyd. not to say it wasnt close cause it was but in a close round are you going to give it to a guy who lands 3-4 mediocre jabs or a guy that lands 3 hard flush shots with force? people just gave it to floyd because it was slow paced and boring but they forgot to actually score on who was landing better punches. its one of those fights in the future when people have no emotional attachment to the fighters people are going to say wait a minute floyd isnt doing anything.

[Boxing_1013]

well that explains it. i can understand someone watching it live and just falling in line with the status quo by saying well i guess floyd won not a lot happened but if you actually watch the punches and who was landing good shots it wasnt hard to see it was pac and not floyd. not to say it wasnt close cause it was but in a close round are you going to give it to a guy who lands 3-4 mediocre jabs or a guy that lands 3 hard flush shots with force? people just gave it to floyd because it was slow paced and boring but they forgot to actually score on who was landing better punches. its one of those fights in the future when people have no emotional attachment to the fighters people are going to say wait a minute floyd isnt doing anything.

I didn't watch it live...I refused to pay for that or be any part of it...I watched it on replay the next day or so I think.

I thought Floyd was doing better work most rounds...I went into the fight completely objective about who won as I generally felt Floyd got favorable cards in his fights...but yeah I had it 8-4...I thought a lot of Manny's work was smothered, and Floyd's work was really clean usually.

How did you score Horn-Pac btw?

[Boxing_1013]

well that explains it. i can understand someone watching it live and just falling in line with the status quo by saying well i guess floyd won not a lot happened but if you actually watch the punches and who was landing good shots it wasnt hard to see it was pac and not floyd. not to say it wasnt close cause it was but in a close round are you going to give it to a guy who lands 3-4 mediocre jabs or a guy that lands 3 hard flush shots with force? people just gave it to floyd because it was slow paced and boring but they forgot to actually score on who was landing better punches. its one of those fights in the future when people have no emotional attachment to the fighters people are going to say wait a minute floyd isnt doing anything.

Also how did you score Fury-Wilder?

[Lomadeaux]

Huh...you're sounding like abouttime lol...you were basically 100% refuted in multiple posts on here...all while being condescending and claiming some sort of privileged status...you are/were wrong man...just admit it, learn from it, and be better...we've all been wrong before, it happens.

I know it is probably embarrassing for you since you've tripled down etc on this stuff...but anybody reading through all this stuff that is objective would read your posts and the refutations to you and would say you look bad dude.

I’ll never get over how ****ing ****** people are on Internet forums.

Once again, I could be arguing with a 20 year old.. so this **** is on me.