What about those even rounds?

Not true. The vast majority of fight fans and pro judges score on WORKRATE. Period.

 

No, I like the way you worded it. I'm just shocked at the people thus far (some of the names on there are just downright shocking) who don't think that even rounds aren't a last resort "that should be avoided" - which it seems to me is very obviously what they are. It's as though these people don't feel that there wouldn't be any even rounds in an ideal world (all they do is unnecessarily obfuscate further a scoring system that's already far from infallible). I guess the only ambiguity some people might be running into in the poll wording is what constitutes "much thought".

 

You really should score clean punching as the big one of the four, but the rules for scoring a bout don't include 4 criteria so 2 can be all but ignored. I would say clean scoring and good aggression should account for about 70% of a round. Unless you are Willy Pep, offense wins, defense helps blunt his offense. But, ring generalship and defense show whose in control, whose comfortable. And in a close round, I'll give the point to that guy.

Yeah, I went pro a year back. I'm an old man by this sports standards, so I'll make no impact whatsoever. Dumb young decisions robbed me of maybe having a good 90's berth.

 

I think judges should score more rounds even if there isn't a clear winner. that's why alot of people yell robbery because fighter a was awarded 7 close rounds that coulda gone either way whereas fighter b who dominated 5 rounds and was close in the other 7 loses the fight.

 

I completely see what you are saying, man. I really do. But judge at a live pro fight ringside. It's quite difficult to see what lands and what doesn't. Alot of judges see a dude throwing and throwing, and can't catch all the slick moves as well as HBO's talented cameramen do. I try not to drill judges on making interesting calls in a fight where a guy is badly outworked-Live, against the backdrop of a crowd, and actually hearing punches land, the judges see something a little different than what we at home see.

But I do agree. I see lots of people use the word "outworked" WAY to often as a reason a fighter won a close fight. There is other things that should be looked for. Workrate falls under EA. Thats 1 of 4, and more needs to be considered.

 

Agree with the first paragraph.

How old, if you don't mind me asking?

 

41 years young. Or old. My optimism fades day to day. I never grew up, but boy, my body did.

 

I think you put it very well here.

 

That's the reason why there could be differences on how the judges sees fights. A very close round can be given to any of the protagonists resulting to controversies.

But me . . . I don't give even rounds when I'm scoring fights. Somebody has to win a round one way or the other.

 

He'd be right about that, although the statement isolated was incorrect, IMV.

Harold Lederman's claim is that it's 90%. I'm more inclined towards that figure, personally. Everything else comes off that, in a three dimensional real-time logistical flow. Built in. In almost every case; if some of these things are happening all of these things are happening.

Who did you have winning Hopkins/Calzaghe?

I agree for the most part.