For me it's always a balancing act / trade off:- Effective power shots Effective jab Activity - 3 minute rounds for 12 rounds, not the last 30 secs of each round! Intelligent Aggression / desire - who WANTS to WIN? Defensive Quality - who can make the aggressor pay and be ineffective? Ring Generalship - who can dictate the pace, positioning and get the other guy following HIS gameplan? Skill application - successful combos / trap setting and feints. Multi-dimensionality / adaptability I don't really subscribe to the 'mechanical' nature of how some others might score rounds - slowing things down, replaying etc. For me it's based on gut feel and what I see transpiring at the time - but usually that means trying to ignore commentators etc who can make you question the evidence of your senses when they just regurgitate what the promoters want to hear or whatever. Some rounds can be very difficult to score when you factor all of these things in.
those are good criterias to look at. I also do not like to replay or slow things down, except in rounds where its really close.
Did Fury puts his his hands behind his back? - round goes to Fury Did Fury makes a face or mock his opponent? - round goes to Fury Did Fury call him a dosser at the weigh in? - round 1 goes to Fury In all seriosuness I normally have a "swing-o-meter" in my mind that works really well just based off work rate/punches landed which is quite easy to get a "feel" for. Thankfully in boxing I find most rounds are fairly easy to score, there is a lot to differentiate one opponents work over the others. This changes in close bouts like earlier Marquez Pacquiao fights.
Aggression (punches thrown) and damage per round. Sometimes the guy on the backfoot is throwing more, sometimes he’s not, but he’s doing more damage. I like to score even rounds too instead of just flipping a coin when it’s hard to decide.
Why damage caused by punches? Thats the most pointless metric, some people cut and bruise easily, while others can take a battering and look like they've done 3 rounds of sparring.
I think he means damage as in who is hitting harder and actually hurting his opponent as measured by winces, visible slowing down, and so on… sometimes that doesn’t show on the face. I don’t usually score rounds based on damage but the one who is doing the most is probably going to win the fight.
A lot of people score fights based on damage visible on the face. It's hard to quantify any sort of damage unless you're inside the boxers head. I mean a lof of arguments for Canelo winning the 2nd GGG fighr were along the lines of "GGG's face is more bruised so he naturally lost the fight"
Not damage on the face or body. Just looking at who’s landing flusher, and harder. It’s very easy to tell when a guy is being broken down or taking a lot of damage. Why you’ll often hear the age old “he can’t take too many of those”.
Personally I love Canelo’s style and the way he moves. but Canelo has been ****ing people’s cards for years, such as 118-110 and that draw for the Floyd fight
Yes that's the sad thing he genuinely is an elite boxer with some serious skills. Good to watch. But so much BS around his fights.
And that is your opinion (a poor one if you ask me). It should not be stated as fact. For example, if one guy is landing jabs intended to do nothing more than register as a punch landed, it might take more of those to equal the other guy landing less shots, but that are obviously intended to do harm. It's a fight. Not a comparison of katas to be judged on their aesthetic value. It also depends some on context. Mostly I try to give the round to the guy that lands more clean,hard shots. The two quoted posts below yours say it pretty well.
Generally on ESB posters give rounds to their favourite or who they want to win irrespective of what is actually happening round by round.
