Is it fair to score fights for runners?

As fair as scoring it for plodders.

 

Nobody was saying the Duncan/Parker/Ginobili San Antonio Spurs ought to be stripped of their championships or barred from the playoffs or anything just because they were boring as hell and the NBA's ratings were down. If a given athlete's/fighter's/team's style hurts their sport temporarily, it shouldn't mean altogether changing the rules in a targeted annililation that style, as that robs us of seeing talented athletes figure out new styles to effectively counter it.

 

Scoring for aggression, albeit effective or not, sounds like it was borne out of early boxing history, being an incentive to make a fight more likely exciting.

When the likes of Corbett, Johnson etc. came along - guys who actually boxed in a fashion that lent itself to hitting whilst not getting hit - they were labelled as Fancy Dans or Cowards at worst.

The more blood lusty crowds wanted to see two men go for it, punch for punch, like Rock ‘em, Sock ‘em robots.

Jack Johnson lost a decision to Marvin Hart. Per many written accounts, Johnson beat the **** out of the more “aggressive” Hart, copping little or no damage in return. By fights end, Hart’s face was a pulped mess - Johnson’s face, conversely unmarked.

Johnson countered Hart to death upon every ineffectual rush he made at Johnson.

However, the ref gave the fight to Hart based on aggression, claiming there would’ve been no fight if not for Harts proactive (yet failed) attempts to get at Johnson.

This may not be the most pure example of the old school perspective on scoring - since the decision was considered dodgy even back then - the decision loss removing Johnson’s steadily built leverage (unbeaten run) to finally get Jeffries to fight him.

Shortly after the Hart fight, the Big Marn, Jeff, retired in 1905. Nice timing, but 5 years later,...not so much.

 

Well if they are landing punches and the other bloke isnt then yeah because they are the only one landing scoring blows.

Clinching though I can't stand though and I wish refs would doc points in the first couple of rounds to cut it out but they rarely do.

Particularly when they just cuddle without throwing any blows.

 

I don't care about "running", unless the runner isn't firing shots. If a runner still has a high volume of punches thrown (IE he's busy), movement is perfectly acceptable.

 

If he outboxed him he outboxed him he deserves to win. Plain and simple.

It is hit and don't get hit after all. If you do that effectively you win.

Also if you get on epower shot against you per round but you've hit him 4, 5 or 6 times. You still win.

Let's be honest. Boxing is a corrupt sport and full of ****.