More an in general type of question but it always bothered me a bit that a guy on his bike gets awarded rounds. To me its like a guy clinching and spoiling his way to victory.I feel it shouldnt be rewarded as much as it is. I get people see it as boxing= hit and not getting hit but there is a difference to some slick counterpuncher setting traps, having ring generalship and countering, and a guy thats on his bike stealing rounds. It always made fights like Hagler vs SRL, Pea vs Oscar etc. Hard to score. Along with solid blows vs flurries which is another subjective thing that often goes to the A side. For example Hopkins vs Tito or Pavlik is a guy outboxing. hit and not getting hit. Andre direll was a runner for example. I feel if you got two guys like that you have no fight and it goes against the spirit of the sport. Therefore awarding a guy on his bike is wrong and the guy pressing the action should get the round if its close.
To me it really doesn't matter what their feet do. It's all about what their hands do. I have no problem scoring for a runner.
The right guy won. Ortiz ran himself out of a title when his opponent was frustrated and there to be scored upon.
I get that but I think its bad for the sport if the running style gets rewarded. If to grow boxing you need more exciting fights. Not that everything has to be Gatto vs Ward but its better if guys want to box/fight. Judges should score that. Like zi feel the Same way about clinching, should be punished more by the ref but inside fighting should be allowed. That way you can still be slick and box but not run/grab your way to a victory by stealing rounds. That would benefit boxing more and would make more people tune in to watch these fights. Thats just part of the solution of course but I wanted to focus just on the running part since it seems more rampant in recent years and it gets seen as sweet science boxing like its Willie Pep while there is a difference imo.
This ^ It's not like anyone wins JUST because they are movers. They still have to land effective punches.
I recorded this and accidently saw the result and reviews. Just deleted it without watching. Tired of runners
I don't think it should be scored against them, but the runner risks losing because it isn't a very good look. Judging is subjective and depending on the judge, running can be a negative.
Running does not win rounds. Punching while running does win rounds. Let's not pretend that what ortiz did is the same as what sándor did. Let's not lie to ourselves, let's be honest with ourselves.
Runners refuse to have the initiative, and if you dont get an advantage by using this running strategy then you are into troubles, because your oponent will see how his agression (taking more risks) is rewarded in the scorecards. And it is perfectly fine imho.
Last nights fight makes a good case for being able to score a loss for both fighters. they both sucked.
Like I said, judging is subjective. Should it be scored against them when the runner lands more punches in more rounds? This can and has happened. But is that the correct decision?