A post for people who still dont know how to score a Boxing Match

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Danny_Rand, Jun 16, 2009.


  1. Danny_Rand

    Danny_Rand Slick N Quick Full Member

    9,989
    2
    Jun 28, 2008
    A number of today's boxing fans and sportswriters don't appreciate the finer points of boxing. There are not too many fighters around today who tuck their chin, show good head movement, use their shoulders for defense, parry punches, block with their gloves, feint and counter-punch. When such advanced boxing techniques are displayed they often go unnoticed. Technique has depreciated to the point, in the modern fight game, where many sportswriters, fans, and judges simply do not comprehend such methods when they see them. Most sportswriters know far less about boxing than they do about other sports like Basketball or Baseball. Many of them would not recognize an evasive shoulder roll that made an opponent miss or they cannot tell a punch that lands on a glove from one that lands "clean." Too many today are one-sided in their evaluation of a boxing match. They over-estimate the worth of "aggressiveness." Online scoring is often a joke.


    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!

    Let's apply these four key categories of judging to three fairly recent and somewhat controversial fights (1999). I have chosen these fights since they are still relatively fresh in the minds of most fans and widely available via tape trading.

    The first fight is a very good example of all of my points. The disputed Oscar DeLaHoya vs. Ike Quartey fight. In this fight Quartey was aggressive and threw the most punches. He threw a great number of jabs. If one paid close attention to the defense of DeLaHoya, however, one would have seen that most of these blows landed on Oscar's gloves, especially in the early rounds. He picked them off successfully and was the better defensive fighter in this bout by far. On the other hand Oscar didn't throw many punches. He tried to punctuate the rounds by finishing with flurries. This made for some very close rounds. One man throwing but not scoring cleanly, the other stalking and waiting but landing in spurts. In using the four categories of judging the fight breaks down thusly:

    DeLaHoya-Quartey:
    1) Effective Aggression: Neither man was clearly better. DeLaHoya stalked but didn't throw enough punches, and Quartey was never able to get Oscar to the ropes. Edge: Even
    2) Defense: DeLaHoya neutralized Quartey's jab, especially in the first five rounds. "Pop, pop" was the loud sound of Ike's jab hitting Delahoya's glove. All except the hardened boxing observers failed to notice this. Edge: DeLaHoya
    3) Ring Generalship: Quartey was able to fight a smarter fight and used lateral movement, which surprised DeLaHoya who was expecting a more stationary target. Edge: Quartey
    4) Clean and hard punching: When Oscar did open up with quick flurries he was able to land cleanly on most occasions. In the 6th they exchanged knockdowns with Quartey getting the better of it. DeLaHoya scored a knockdown and had Ike in trouble against the ropes in 12th and final round. Edge: DeLaHoya
    This was a very close fight that was about even going into the last round. Delahoya's aggression and knockdown and hard punching resulted in a two point round giving him a close but deserved decision. The majority of boxing fans agreed with the decision.

    Another recent example was the DeLaHoya-Trinidad unification match.

    1) Effective aggression: Trinidad was aggressive but not at all effective. He neither cut the ring nor forced DeLaHoya to the ropes. Oscar initiated most of the punching exchanges when he chose to fight and was effective. Edge: Even
    2) Defense: Oscar was clearly the better defensive fighter making Trinidad miss and making him pay. Many of the punches that impressed the crowd were blocked or just plain missed! Edge: DeLaHoya
    3) Ring Generalship: For most of the fight DeLaHoya made Felix look like an amateur! He controlled the tempo of the fight, fought "his fight" keeping the fight in ring center. Edge: DeLaHoya
    4) Clean and hard punching: The first 8 rounds were virtually all DeLaHoya. He scored often with his jab, landed with quick flurries, while most of Trinidad's blows were blocked and slipped effectively. Only in the last few rounds was Trinidad able to mount any kind of an offense as Oscar coasted -too sure of his victory. Edge: DeLaHoya.
    For a complete round by round synopsis of this fight (Click Here).
    This was an easy fight to score using the four categories for judging a professional boxing match. The Quartey fight was much closer. DeLaHoya was robbed of a rightful win in this match 8-4 in rounds, 7-5 at worst. Here too the majority of boxing fans thought DeLaHoya won.

    The recent Lewis-Holyfield rematch is our final example.

    1) Effective aggression: Holyfield was the aggressor throughout most of this fight and he was effective at times especially in the middle rounds. In the early rounds he didn't throw enough punches to be effective, and Lennox picked it up late around the 8th and 9th rounds. Edge: Holyfield
    2) Defense: Holyfield was taken apart in the first fight by Lennox left jab. His defense was better and he was able to land more through Lewis defense. On the other hand Evander wasn't too difficult to hit either as Lennox still could score with the jab whenever he put it to good use, and also the uppercut. Lewis legs and defense, especially the clinch helped him to survive when he was hurt in the 7th. Edge: Even
    3) Ring Generalship: Lennox was the better ring general even though Evander improved in this area. For the most part Lennox still controlled most of the fight in ring center. Just because Evander made a better effort than last time doesn't mean he was better. Lennox still fought a smart fight. Edge: Lewis
    4) Clean and hard punching: Evander landed the harder punches especially in the 6th and 7th rounds. Lewis landed more punches, controlled with his jab and landed more combinations in this fight. He scored more often with "clean" punches, while Evander landed the harder punches. The round should go to the person who won 2/3 or more of the round rather than the person who lands several hard punches at the end of a round. An example of this is the third round. Watch this round again on tape. Lewis is in control after 2:30 of the round clearly out boxing Holyfield. Then Holyfield lands a big right and finished with a combination some of which does not land cleanly. Many scored this round for Holyfield but it was clearly Lewis round. Edge: Lewis
    It was a closer and more competitive fight this time, but once again Lennox Lewis deserved the decision and is the rightful heavyweight champion of the world.

    The next time you score a fight remember these four categories of judging. Another thing that will help immensely is to watch the clock and divide the round into thirds. Look for the minute marks and decide who is better based on the above criteria during that minute. Whoever wins two or more minutes in a close, competitive round is the winner of that round. Watch out for the guy who does nothing for most of the round and then tries to steal it at the end, unless he scores a knockdown or has his opponent in serious trouble he should be viewed as the loser of the round. If one fighter is somewhat better in the first and the other in the second minute of the round, and the third minute is still up for grabs then give the guy who finishes the round credit.
     
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,182
    48,452
    Mar 21, 2007

    I agree with some of this.

    I think people get carried away with their own criteria. I score fights too, I am interested in my own opinion too, i am also interested in your score-card, whoever you may be.

    But there is far to much faith placed in "unpaid" scorecards. Boxing - and it's rules - evolve. It's the judges who are briefed as to these processes, which also occur by osmosis. In other words, judges are on the ground at the sight privvy to any shifts in changes of onus or rules. The guy sitting at home with beer and outrage is not.

    Part of the new faith in private scorecards is down to terrible judging and genuine robberies that have occured in boxing - Holyfield-Lewis one perhaps the best example. Still, in a close fight, when the judges score a close decision or a split one, and people start shouting "robbery" i get very frustrated. I scored Marquez-Pacquiao II for Juan Manuel, but it was so close that I wasn't surprised or angry when the judges disagreed. But logging onto the forum I discovered people were absolutely furious because the offical cards were not the same as their own. Which I think is ridiculous.
     
  3. Leonit

    Leonit Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,331
    4
    Jan 6, 2009
    If some fighter don't do nothing for the whole round but in the last 30 seconds score 20 conections and his opponent has scored 12 for example I will give the round to the fighter with more connection. The fight is all ready divided in many rounds which was problem for some people for the Clottey fight. So I don't divide the rounds to more rounds. Clottey is a good example becasue if the fight was one big round I would score it directly for Clottey but on rounds he lost for me.
     
  4. Leonit

    Leonit Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,331
    4
    Jan 6, 2009
    P.S thakns for the tips I agree on most of them
     
  5. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,469
    Sep 7, 2008
    Danny_Rand it is all subjective. Others score it a different way.

    Which is why some people have Calzaghe winning, some have Hopkins winning. It depends what you like. Aggression or precision. Ring generalship or attempts to force the action.

    For example, I think Calzaghe's aggression was SO unclean that in some rounds when Hopkins was landing only two or three punches HE took the round. Cotto was much more refined in his approach, and even though he was evading a lot of Clottey's rushes rather than genuinely employing lateral movement, I think that was down to Clottey nutting him early on; Cotto needed a few seconsd to genuinely run so he had a second to sort his eye out.

    A rematch is in order; I agree that much. If he remains uncut Cotto will be more dominant, Clottey is solid but nothing spectacular IMO :good
     
  6. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,469
    Sep 7, 2008
    Agreed! Cotto-Clottey was not Santa Cruz-Casamayor.

    For the record I had Marquez winning that 2nd fight 115-112. But Pac winning a split was not a bad thing, it depends what you like. I'm open-minded enough to see that you can judge fights in other way, not to put 'tips for people who don't know how to score' on ESB like some pretentious overlord who thinks he knows more than everyone else, just to try and get people to agree with his own opinion and therefore justify it :good
     
  7. Danny_Rand

    Danny_Rand Slick N Quick Full Member

    9,989
    2
    Jun 28, 2008
    Not really. The rules are pretty specific on how you're supposed to score a fight. And it makes the most sense.

    Oh and Clottey had what, a 40% connect percentage for most of the fight? Cotto didnt evade much. Whereas Cotto had a 22% connect percentage.

    And defense is part of scoring.
     
  8. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,469
    Sep 7, 2008
    O.K, there is clearly no reasoning with you. I've never come across you before, I'll just assume you're not the kind of poster that it is even worth talking too. You're officially in my FINITO/Jeff M/PowerPuncher group now; time wasting boxrec-trawlers :good
     
  9. Jeff Young

    Jeff Young Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,656
    0
    Jun 5, 2009
    danny_rand, i can see your getting a lot of ****, i for one actually agree with a lot of your post...I dont think it was a robbery.....but i think either way its 114-113...i had it for cotto, but could have just as easily gone clottey.....i think its even a stretch to go 115-112, and its laughable to go 116-111.....

    i did find it interesting how lampley commented that it took longer then average to tally the scores....hmmm

    but i wouldnt call it a robbery....but i agree with a lot of your post.
     
  10. Danny_Rand

    Danny_Rand Slick N Quick Full Member

    9,989
    2
    Jun 28, 2008

    40% connect percentage. Landed 50 more punches. Let that simmer in your brain for awhile.
     
  11. Danny_Rand

    Danny_Rand Slick N Quick Full Member

    9,989
    2
    Jun 28, 2008
    :good
     
  12. Ricky369

    Ricky369 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,468
    144
    Feb 16, 2008
    Whatever. You just scored a fight 114-113 and called it a robbery because the other guy won. That is all I need to know. One point its not robbery. That only means that people with more experience than you saw it differently.
     
  13. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,182
    48,452
    Mar 21, 2007

    Absolutley correct, inarguable in all but the most freakish of situations.
     
  14. Relentless

    Relentless VIP Member banned

    65,864
    16
    Mar 5, 2006
    danny get the sand out your vagina.
     
  15. Starched Him

    Starched Him Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,681
    61
    Feb 5, 2009
    D and B is my favorite but both are over looked especially B