We all know there are four criteria used to score fights. But most people really only consider punches, and often lump together aggressiveness and ring generalship. How do you all score defence? How much weight do you give it in a fight? And how do you balance that against aggression by the opponent?
Defence is just punches avoided. Against great defencesive fighters if you havn't got a smart offence or high output offence then you're pretty much screwed. Just watch a Mayweather fight when he is slipping and avoiding punches near the ropes.
Good question innit? I guess that since the criteria is effective aggression, I guess that defense could be seen to seen as a factor that reduces the opponents offense
As for it weighting one's scoring versus aggression - what kind of aggression? Moving forward throwing mad bombs? If they're all just churning air or washing up on the opponent's forearms, that is called ineffective aggression. If next to nothing is landing, or what little that lands is glancing and not a clean blow with the flat of the knuckles connecting solidly on a legal scoring area without being partly intercepted by an elbow or glove - then aggression gets no consideration in scoring. Zilch. Zip. Zero. There is no call to directly contrast defense and effective aggression in their value as scoring criteria. If one guy's aggression is effective that means (in a nutshell, somewhat oversimplified) that he is landing...which means the opponent's defense isn't. The actual connects themselves are counted under the separate criteria of "clean effective punching", but the other two criteria are what support and enable that clean effective punching - "ring generalship" and "effective aggression". (the former having to do more with positioning, footwork, balance, the angles you're able to set up - basically in a nutshell always being in a more advantageous position than your opponent and forcing him to react to what you're doing so you can maneuver him like a pawn...literally, commanding the battlefield of the ring as its general...the latter is more about how you're setting yourself up in your attacks to succeed in the form of "clean effective punching" - your work rate, shot selection, how much power you're putting into your shots and sitting down on them, etc.) If your aggression is effective, you land clean effective punches. The more you land them, the more scoring favors you. If your aggression is ineffective, because the opponent is slipping, blocking, ducking, grabbing, picking off, turning you, beating you to the punch with quick counters before you've gotten all the way off, etc. - then his defense is working, and scoring then favors him. The #1 criteria is clean effective punching, and the others sort of just orbit around it and directly relate to it. So, put more simply, there is an inverse correlation between the effectiveness of a boxer's aggression (which dictates whether or not it ought to factor into credit toward scoring for him: effective yes credit, ineffective no credit) and the opponent's defense. (likewise: aggressor scoring no credit; not scoring yes credit).
Agree with the general tone of the above. Unless someone has had to pick themselves off the floor, counting the number of correctly landed, scoring punches pretty much always tells you what you need to know. The whole Compubox thing about jabs vs so-called power punches (Sonny Liston anybody?) might be interesting in terms of working out where a fight is going, but from a scoring perspective it's pretty much irrelevant. Same for defensive style, considered independently of what the other guy is landing. Ultimately, the judges job is to measure performance and the criteria are pretty objective. Otherwise it might as well be figure skating.
It is according to the fight. A fight like Donaire vs Rigo, defense is more important. When there are rounds where both guys land under 10 punches and the difference is 1 or 2 punches, you have to look more closely for who is using the ring most effectively. Also some fighters are given more credit for defense because it is expected to be part of their game like Floyd. He is known as defensive fighter so judges are looking for him to duck and dodge and may give him rounds where his opponent misses often even if the guy does land some punches.