Canelo is the most overrated boxer ever

[Boxing-1013]

Read, study, learn.

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

"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."

No you dont. If you are making your opponent miss you are showing effective defense..

This isnt the amateurs. You dont get "points".

So yes you can win an "exchange" if you can even call it that, by making your opponent look silly and tire out by making him miss.

Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense. Most judges that 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.

[Ochoa780]

Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense. Most judges that 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.

Nobody is twisting anything.

You score clean EFFECTIVE punching, ring generalship. These are far older standards than a pbc article that got dug up

If you can make your opponent miss you control the action that is part of ring generalship.

Punch stats are the equivalent of a guy with a cattle counter clicking every time HE thinks a punch that landed lands.

If you've watched boxing for a long time you can judge a round by just watching. Each round is suppose to be judged as an individual fight. And its helpful to note early success in a round so as not to let a late round flurry sway you.

[Boxing-1013]

Nobody is twisting anything.

You score clean EFFECTIVE punching, ring generalship. These are far older standards than a pbc article that got dug up

If you can make your opponent miss you control the action that is part of ring generalship.

Punch stats are the equivalent of a guy with a cattle counter clicking every time HE thinks a punch that landed lands.

If you've watched boxing for a long time you can judge a round by just watching. Each round is suppose to be judged as an individual fight. And its helpful to note early success in a round so as not to let a late round flurry sway you.

You are scoring the punches that land and their effectiveness. That's all there is to it man.

Again - a guy who isn't even attempting to throw punches, in my view, is always doing worse than a guy who is throwing but missing. At least one guy is TRYING to score and is able to try. The other guy isn't even good enough to throw a shot in that scenario.

It's not some old PBC article.

It's an article from a noted judge - telling you how he and EVERY OTHER JUDGE he knows scores fights.

The internet is a funny thing - you can prove it right to someone's face how wrong they are, and they will still stick to their story and double down.

[New England]

I thought he went 1-1 vs GGG. He's a very good fighter, I don't think he's overhyped at all

he beat the **** out of golovkin in the second fight.

[Ochoa780]

You are scoring the punches that land and their effectiveness. That's all there is to it man.

Again - a guy who isn't even attempting to throw punches, in my view, is always doing worse than a guy who is throwing but missing. At least one guy is TRYING to score and is able to try. The other guy isn't even good enough to throw a shot in that scenario.

It's not some old PBC article.

It's an article from a noted judge - telling you how he and EVERY OTHER JUDGE he knows scores fights.

The internet is a funny thing - you can prove it right to someone's face how wrong they are, and they will still stick to their story and double down.

Prove his opinion?

The funny thing about people these days is they take peoples personal opinions and say they are facts. Judges score fights differently based on their preferences, others feel the same some dont. He said he and some of his peers feel that way, this isnt gospel bro

Just how you may give a dude missing wild a round and others may give the guy avoiding the punches the round. That's why theres 3 judges

[Boxing-1013]

he beat the **** out of golovkin in the second fight.

Man that's a really low bar for beating the sh.it out of someone. He didn't even come close to getting 6 rounds any decent card. Got outlanded almost every round, lol.

[Boxing-1013]

Prove his opinion?

The funny thing about people these days is they take peoples personal opinions and say they are facts. Judges score fights differently based on their preferences, others feel the same some dont. He said he and some of his peers feel that way, this isnt gospel bro

Just how you may give a dude missing wild a round and others may give the guy avoiding the punches the round. That's why theres 3 judges

He said that he and every judge he knows, agree that scoring fights comes down to scoring clean punches that land, and then evaluating how effective those punches are that land.

[Ochoa780]

He said that he and every judge he knows, agree that scoring fights comes down to scoring clean punches that land, and then evaluating how effective those punches are that land.

Dude this is the same guy that didnt score a single round for Algeri against provodnikov gtfoh

[Boxing-1013]

Dude this is the same guy that didnt score a single round for Algeri against provodnikov gtfoh

I'm not arguing for his acumen in scoring fights - what I'm showing you is what he, and every other judge he knows, is looking for.

Reasonable people can differ as far as who wins a round or a fight even sometimes. I feel like 95% of fights have 1 winner but sometimes, Lara Hurd is maybe an example, there are fights that could go either way or it is a draw.

All the judges look for is what lands, and then they grade how effective those punches are. Usually landing more is enough to win a round, but that's not always the case as we know.

[Ochoa780]

I'm not arguing for his acumen in scoring fights - what I'm showing you is what he, and every other judge he knows, is looking for.

Reasonable people can differ as far as who wins a round or a fight even sometimes. I feel like 95% of fights have 1 winner but sometimes, Lara Hurd is maybe an example, there are fights that could go either way or it is a draw.

All the judges look for is what lands, and then they grade how effective those punches are. Usually landing more is enough to win a round, but that's not always the case as we know.

You're making no sense, we should follow this guys scoring criteria but ignore his wack score cards?

The problem is youre saying "every other judge". No he said some people hes talked to.. like I said it's not gospel, judges score fights differently.