How are fights scored?

Effective Aggression – Being aggressive gives the impression of dominance, but unless the boxer is landing shots and not constantly getting countered, it’s not exactly “effective.” Judges look for effective aggression, where the aggressor consistently lands his punches and avoids those from his opponent.

http://coolmaterial.com/feature/how-to-score-a-boxing-match/ Go read a little.

 

Take it easy, you've just nullified Joe Calzaghe's entire career.

But yeah, the criteria you are quoting here is straight out of the Association of Boxing Commission's regulatory guidelines for judges.

 

There was a video posted about Round 9 of Canelo vs Triple G where this was highlighted. In the round you had G outlanding Canelo with some very light jabs and punches that were partly blocked or partly slipped by Canelo. You had Canelo landing fewer total punches in the round but the punches he landed were much harder cleaner and more effective than G's punches that had little effect.

In the video the fan was making the argument that Canelo won the round because G's punches had little to no effect, while Canelo's did. We can all agree that G threw more punches and outlanded Canelo in the round. We haven't heard much about the technique of scoring a round because everyone has their way of scoring a round and most fans are biased who will tend to score close rounds for the fighter they are rooting for or the fighter that has the style they like.

The best way to answer your question is to take an example of a round that fits your description, in this case Canelo vs Triple G Round 9. This was a round that most people just automatically gave Triple G because he was throwing more and "outworking" Canelo, but in doing so, no one really wants to go through and make the determination of determining a winner based on how effective the punches were. This nuance to scoring is largely being ignored.

I think a round like this Round 9 brings to light an understanding of how Bryd, the judge that scored the Round for Canelo, was scoring the fight. Byrd was obviously putting a greater emphasis on the "effectiveness" of the punches landed rather than just being swayed by the total number of punches thrown and partly landed / less effective punches.

A lot of people criticized Byrd for her 118-110 scorecard which obviously favored the "effective punching" more than the other two cards. Well in Round 9 here's a round that I have no problem with Canelo winning due to him landing the better, harder, and more effective punches. He also had better "defense" in the round by slipping a lot of G punches and making G miss wildly on occasion. the factor, can you take a look at Round 9 Canelo vs Triple G or perhaps the video I am referring to and we can discuss the technique needed in scoring that round accurately.

 

Close fights like GGG vs Canelo and Ward vs Kovalev are almost impossible for the fans of either fighters to clearly say who won those fights there are just to close to call

So we have rematches to see who can adjust and win their fight more clearly . Like Ward Kovalev 2 we got a KO

Just like in the GGG vs Canelo round 1, i watched it didn't see GGG really land any clean round stealing punches at all and Canelo only really lands a couple of punches. So I gave that round to Canelo. GGG fans and HBO Herold Letterman gives the round to GGG. That round and the first 3 rounds makes the fight a draw because Canelo cleary won the first 3 rounds or 1 round in the middle or 1 round or 2 even and the last 2 rounds of the fight acording to most of us , not all of us thoug. But Canelo didn't win the fight if you had GGG wining the fight by 1 or 2 rounds i cant argue with that.

So close mega fights like that we just are not gonna agree anyway. On who really won a fight that 2 or one round scored for Canelo instead of for GGG makes the fight a draw

Look at the Highlights of this fight , this fight is a real robbery not even close.
So they made it a Draw, robbed the hell out of Whitaker.

The whole fight was like this.
This is a robbery not a close fight

This content is protected

And some Chavez fans at my job where saying he won or it was a Draw so asking how you judge a fight is not gonna sway the fans that GGG vs Canelo or Ward vs Kovalev were very close fights that can be a Draw not a robbery like Whitaker vs Chavez.

This fight is a clear win for Mayweather everyone can agree except maybe 10% of the world mostly in the Philippines cause that's his, Pacquiao home country.

This is not a robbery not a close fight.

This content is protected

This is a close fight GGG could of won by a point or two or could call it a draw. But Canelo didn't win the fight.

This content is protected

This is a close fight not a robbery. could be a Draw or Ward could of won or Kovalev could of won to close to call both sides have good points.

This content is protected

Judging fights are for most people is subjective not Objective and people have their on way even if it is against the rules of scoring thats just how it is in this sport .

Subjective information or writing is based on personal opinions, interpretations, points of view, emotions and judgment.
Example ward Kovalev fight 2. Ref says Punches on the belt line are legal . ward punches on the belt line . Fans of Kovalev those punches are Low, Blows.

Objective information or analysis is fact-based, measurable and observable.
Ref says Punches on the Belt line are legal. Boxing Fans say those shots are legal Ref said so we cant complain.

 

Clean Punches
Effective Aggression
Ring Generalship
Defense

Those are the criteria. They're subjective enough that they're hard to weigh. I like the way Steve Weisfeld explains it:

Clean punches: To me, clean punches are the most important aspect, and the other factors are really tied to that. Take the phrase, "effective aggressiveness." How is a boxer effective? He's effective by landing clean punches. How about "defense?" A boxer shows great defense by not getting hit with clean punches. And, finally, the term "ring generalship." A boxer uses the ring to put himself in a position to land clean punches.

http://www.premierboxingchampions.c...ge-steve-weisfeld-offers-tips-how-score-fight

 

You're making a bold statement that "Ward could have won" vs Kovalev but aren't saying the same thing for Canelo winning vs G.

Remember Ward suffered a knockdown which gave Kovalev an automatic 10-8, and he was down by a lot more on the scorecards vs Kovalev in their first fight than Canelo was vs G.

Both fights were close, and you can certainly make an argument for either fighter in both fights. What I've been trying to do is take a look at some of the rounds that everyone seemed to have given to G and re-examining them. If you are so sure it was only a draw or a G win, then examine rounds like Round 9, which was a round that Canelo did very well in and if Canelo won that round on all 3 cards he would have won the fight.

The first thing you should do is erase that line in the sand that you're drawing that "Canelo didn't win”. That suggests to me that you’re biased towards G and probably are a G fan. I beg to differ, Canelo did win because he landed the better, harder, more impactful, more effective punches round after round. G landed more overall punches but a good amount of them were ineffective light insignificant punches, some hard to tell if they actually landed due to Canelo’s tight defense and upper body movement. And unlike Ward Kovalev 1, there was no knock down so every round’s scoring is debatable.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph

 

What technique did you utilize to make the determination that G won that round? CA vs G is a good bout to use as an example to answer your questions about how fights are scored. We have a good example here of a quantity vs quality situation in most of the rounds. Why don't we take a look at the rounds that most people scored for G in this fight (generally rounds 4-9) and discuss what you are looking for, what you are looking at to decide who won those rounds.

 

That suggests to me that you’re biased towards Canelo and probably are a Canelo fan.

When I rescored the fight in slo mo it became apparent that Golovkin actually outlanded Canelo in round 3, which I had as a firm Canelo round. Looks like this fight wasn't as close as most people think.

I had Golovkin landing the harder punches. Canelo was driven back by GGG's attack time after time and he was unable to stand up to it.

 

It sounds like you're trying to count punches rather than scoring the round based on the effectiveness of each punch. Are you trying to say that now you no longer feel that Canelo won the 3rd round?

Pay attention to the OP :

This means any round where you count more punches from G, you can still score the round for Canelo. You understand that right? Please clarify who you thought won the 3rd round and if you pay attention to the effectiveness and impact of the punches (rather than solely the number of punches that you count) in deciding who won the round.

You're speaking in generalizations. Boxing matches are scored on a round by round basis. Why don't you be more specific and tell us who you had landing the harder punches in Round 3 and in Round 9.

 

Why do you call Golovkin/GGG, Gx3?

Do you think you are cool doing that?

Hipster.

 

What I'm saying is that there are grounds through which to score that round to score that round for GGG.

And vice versa using your criteria.

I had it 18 to 16 in round 3 to GGG and 21 to 16 to GGG in 9. I'll have to rewatch to grade the punches exactly.