two pet peeves are Ring generalship-Really has to be one of the most subjective ****ing criteria, whats it really mean? the smoother looking fighter? the one with the better footwork or prettier style? shouldnt the ring general be the one dominating the round? end of story. Effective aggression - guy constantly coming foward? so in a close rd does the guy forcing the action get the nod? if so why didnt Cotto win more rds in the fight on Sat? He was effectively aggressing all the close rds. Frazier would have lost to Ali in 71 in their first fight (for all new jacks) if scored using todays citeria which seems to favor the negative fight, playing keepaway and flurrying.
Here's a good explanation: a) Effective Aggression The key to the first category is the word "effective." One may be going forward, trying to get at ones opponent, forcing them back, but not throwing punches, or missing badly. In order to be "effective" one must have success landing consistently while moving forward. It should be noted that the opponent, who is "out-boxing" or keeping the fight at a distance, can be the "effective aggressor" by initiating the punching exchanges. b) Defense A badly over-looked aspect of boxing, especially in scoring a fight. Defense is a part of combat. In boxing it is the ability to hit the opponent without being hit in return. Defense may include ducking, dodging, bobbing and weaving, parrying, blocking, slipping, and sidestepping, as well as effectively utilizing the clinch. c) Ring Generalship The person who dictates the tempo of the fight and controls the action in the ring is the ring general. The boxer who makes the other man fight his fight. If fighter A keeps the fight in ring center, and nullifies the "aggression" of fighter B he is the better ring general." Or if fighter B effectively cuts off the ring and forces fighter A to the ropes where he can go to work he then is the better ring general. d) Clean and Hard Punching This should be obvious, but it's not. Since many fans and sportswriters ignore the two previous categories they often fail to understand what is actually taking place in the ring. A "clean" blow is one that lands flush without being blocked by his opponent. But how many times has one heard an announcer "Oh what a left hook by so and so!" The problem is the punch landed on his opponent's glove and only made a loud noise and didn't score at all. Some blows are "partially blocked"; meaning it did not land with its full force. Such blows are not "clean" punches. Also it is not the amount of punches that are thrown the matters, but the amount of blows that land. Hard punching is important as the amount of damage a blow causes counts in the scoring. In the amateurs a knockdown is only as good as a jab, but in the pro's its worth much more. One hard right that staggers the opponent though is not worth ten hard jabs that snap back the opponent's head. Damaging blows and their value are difficult to assess and that is why boxing is subjective. However it should be noted that landing 3 or 4 punches that hurt an opponent in the last seconds of a round are not enough to make up for losing the first two and a half minutes of the round where he was out-boxed. After all the name of the game is boxing not slugging!
I don't think many people know how the scoring citeria is supposed to work. For example, many people think simply coming foward constitutes effective agression. It obviously doesn't. I personally think that all the scoring criteria derives from clean, effective punching. If you're doing that, and your opponent is doing it to a lesser degree, then you've won the round. Of course, many people struggle to indentify what clean, effective punching is.
Excellent summary. Though I would say effective aggression does not require a fighter to be moving forward. I would say effective aggression is essentially landing hard, accurate effective shots (and is thus linked with hard and clean punching), whether moving backwards, sideways or forwards. I would also add that there is an order in how you score. Effective aggression is one. If you can't separate the fighters off that you go for the ring general (including defence and frustrating your opponent. Then, and ONLY then if you can't decide a winner based on the first categories, do you score on PURE aggression and award the round to the aggressive come forward fighter. Excellent post.
