MYTH: Close Scores Can Go Either Way (BUSTED)

[McNulty]

I see a lot of amateur comments out there to the effect of it was a close fight, could have gone either way.

Thats not a rule people, thats a myth.

You CAN have a close fight and have a CLEAR winner. Y’all think if its a two round victory for fighter A it could just as well have been a two round victory for fighter B — WRONG.

As a shítty form of reasoning people will often say there are different ways of scoring, this is also WRONG. There is one way to score, the right way and thats a fact.

There is a tiered criterion. You can’t just say, well I’m a judge and I like ring generalship over power, power is over-rated. WRONG, power is NOT over-rated and power is the number 1 criteria otherwise you wouldn’t get a dang point for dropping the other guy.

At 7:18 Thurman himself said he scored his fight against Porter a 2 round victory, but a CLEAR victory win. There is a valuable lesson in those words.



Source: https://www.boxingscene.com/thurman-...ampion--131733

Don't let the lack of judging ability alter the perception of what happened in the ring especially with all the corruption out there. Learn how to score, read articles and watch video's from judges who know how to score perfectly on the highest level with a consistent track record, get better at scoring.

[NearHypnos]

Power is subjective. It’s fairly well known that the upper fighters tend to have better chins and power. But power is subjective to each fighter.

I think what you mean is DAMAGE not power. Guys with stellar chins and abnormal pain tolerances don’t feel it the way others do. There’s also history and other variables to take into account. Anyone hitting Khan for example can seem a devastating puncher but if they land that same punch on Danny Garcia, he doesnt even blink.

With that being said, I disagree with you on some of it but I see where you’re coming from.

I think dropping a guy isnt an automatic win of a round for example.


I do think close and competitive are used interchangably but incorrectly. Like you can have a “close” (but really the term that should be used is competitive in these cases) fight yet have a guy win a near shutout.

Floyd-Cotto, Canelo-Cotto, etc. Competitive DOESNT always mean close score wise. We agree there if that's what you mean

[McNulty]

Power is subjective. It’s fairly well known that the upper fighters tend to have better chins and power. But power is subjective to each fighter.

I think what you mean is DAMAGE not power. Guys with stellar chins and abnormal pain tolerances don’t feel it the way others do. There’s also history and other variables to take into account. Anyone hitting Khan for example can seem a devastating puncher but if they land that same punch on Danny Garcia, he doesnt even blink.

With that being said, I disagree with you on some of it but I see where you’re coming from.

I think dropping a guy isnt an automatic win of a round for example.

I do think close and competitive are used interchangably but incorrectly. Like you can have a “close” (but really the term that should be used is competitive in these cases) fight yet have a guy win a near shutout.

Floyd-Cotto, Canelo-Cotto, etc. Competitive DOESNT always mean close score wise. We agree there if that's what you mean

To the untrained eye, power is subjective but it's not. If you know what you're looking for, there are plenty of tells.

All you need to do is make the other guy stop/change*/etc what he's doing as a result of your power shot for the power to be recognized and scored.

A fighter is teeing off on you coming forward with flimsy shots, you hit him with a good shot --- no need for potholes --- just make the other guy stop what he's doing, get on his bike when he wasn't, hold, recalculate, etc are all telltale signs of a positive result in power. There will be varying degree's of that, but those are baseline elements.

Some guys just kinda hang tight, but they're recalculating and thats visible to the trained eye. I got stunned competing in the amateurs by a headbutt that went through the headgear (yes it happens). I have the video. My face is the same I just do a long blink but IRL I was rocked. The telltale sign was I got to holding, then got out of the corner I was in. There was a reaction there.

Your Khan example actually goes against subjectivity which is the overall point you're erroneously trying to make(?). Unless you just landed on Earth, you got to know Khan has a * chin and that's that. Experienced judges know the fighters. I know who's tough and I know who has power and when they fight, thats all calculating upstairs.

Going back to Khan, not sure if you know but Khan has a lot of great wins against great punchers that throw damaging shots. I'm talking about power, not damage. There's a difference and just because your a power puncher doesn't mean every punch you land is indicitative of your power. That goes against Boxing basics of punch tempo, this is all elementary non-issues. Maybe they do land the same shot on Garcia and he does more than blink. No way to know that intelligently.

I never said dropping a guy is an automatic win, but it's an automatic point. Please reread.

No, that's not what I mean (your last bits there). I mean if the scores are like 1-3 rounds apart people will say well it was so close it could have went either way. Its like you got to win by 4 rounds to be considered a legit win.

You can have a clear winner thats been scored properly by one round in a close fight, it doesn't have to go the other way and rarely is that a reality. I see it all the time. I manually score (text file on pc) a lot of fights. I do score even rounds unlike most judges today and with that said, I rarely score an even round. Maybe every 5-7 main event fights I'll score an even round.

[DuckAdonis]

Power? You mean effective agression ?

[McNulty]

Power? You mean effective agression ?

No, I mean power.

[DuckAdonis]

No, I mean power.

But power is not a scoring criteria?

[TonyGe]

No, I mean power.

So how do you reconsile that with a guy who uses his jab as a primary punch. I don't understand your point..

[McNulty]

But power is not a scoring criteria?

Power is #1 on scoring criteria. Ask Jerry Roth or Steve Weisfeld.

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.

Source: http://www.premierboxingchampions.co...ow-score-fight


Power sits high on his mountain.

So how do you reconsile that with a guy who uses his jab as a primary punch. I don't understand your point..

What don't you understand? A jab is worth less than a power punch. If you jab me and I hit you with a right hand, unless your jab is putting me on queer street the right hand scores higher.

Boxing basics man. Where are you people from Mars? Embarassing to be honest.

[TonyGe]

Power is #1 on scoring criteria. Ask Jerry Roth or Steve Weisfeld.



Source: http://www.premierboxingchampions.co...ow-score-fight


Power sits high on his mountain.



What don't you understand? A jab is worth less than a power punch. If you jab me and I hit you with a right hand, unless your jab is putting me on queer street the right hand scores higher.

Boxing basics man. Where are you people from Mars? Embarassing to be honest.

Your embarassing because your jumping to conclusions. All I am asking you is to clarify what you mean. Your last statement makes no sense.

If you jab me and I hit you with a right hand, unless your jab is putting me on queer street the right hand scores higher.

As a blanket statement that is incorrect.

A fighter can be hit with a right hand that has no effect on him. While a jab can stop a fighter in his tracks or confuse him and takes him out of his game plan. You have to look at the punches and see what they are accomplishing. Larry Holmes won a lot of fights based on his jab. Sorry your not from Mars your just a homegrown idiot.

[McNulty]

Your embarassing because your jumping to conclusions. All I am asking you is to clarify what you mean. Your last statement makes no sense.

As a blanket statement that is incorrect.

A fighter can be hit with a right hand that has no effect on him. While a jab can stop a fighter in his tracks or confuse him and takes him out of his game plan. You have to look at the punches and see what they are accomplishing. Larry Holmes won a lot of fights based on his jab. Sorry your not from Mars your just a homegrown idiot.

You're a fùcking halfwit embarassment. I did tell you what I meant. Why you splitting hairs like a yenta? Lets talk percentages because thats the fùcking context you dumb cùnt. You've obviously never Boxed in your life and have zero Boxing knowledge. Like 0.0%, not 0.5% or 0.2%.

99.9% of the time a jab is just a measuring stick, probe, or a set-up shot. Yea sure, every now and then you'll get an Aaron Davis who rocked a Mark Breland type with a jab, but thats like 0.5% of the time. Right hands NATURALLY have more power. I'm not talking about the 1% of the time when a right hand is a throw away punch or a flim-flam shot --- most of the time a right hand is a power punch (unless your a southpaw and I am talking to a mongoloid so I guess I have to be ultra-specific).

Larry Holmes never ever won a fight just based on his jab. He was a precision 1-2 fighter. I watched every single one of his fights. Keep being a troll and I'll end this for good. You're consistently an idiot, I remember your name. Keep it up.

Oo wait, look you're right! I am so sorry!!!



Oops, fixed fight. You lose again!