People not factoring in defense while scoring invalidates their cards completely.

There's a reason why professional judges are where they are and casual watchers are where they are. I see so many people refusing to factor in defense while scoring pugilistic battles and it baffles the mind.

So many people only factor in clean punching and effective aggression and it honestly showcases complete and blatant noviceness and ignorance in their knowledge of fight scoring.

Defense
Clean punching
Ring generalship
Effective aggression

I see too many people scoring a round for a fight who did more damage, and it's ridiculous. Just asinine. People get too swayed by crowd reactions and damage.

You have to factor in what happened for the entire round. You have to factor in defense strongly, it's one of the critical categories to score fights on. Ffs.

In my opinion, defense should be prioritized because of the lvl of difficulty it requires to execute on a high lvl. However, even if you don't see it my way, it should at least one 25% of your consideration when it comes to scoring.

More people need to learn to score properly. There's a reason why Im probably the best scorer, I score on all categories, you can't undermine defense. It invalidates your card completely. Pro judges score on defense too. That's the diff. Even in barn burners, YOU HAVE TO FACTOR IN DEFENSE!!

I see a ton of people raging about pro judge fight cards, they talk about how they're so wrong on all accounts. No, genius, they're doing the right thing of factoring in defense as well.

In 1946, Pep won a round against Jackie Graves without landing a single punch. This goes to show that landing punches are somewhat overrated. It certainly is not the end all be all of boxing.

 

To the untrained eye, it's ridiculous. To pros and people who know a damn about scoring, it's completely right. Perhaps I should give you a lesson on fight scoring. I love teaching.

 

Well, that's obviously wrong because I don't do live scoring lol. How did you see it? I score after the fight. I don't believe in live scoring, it's not accurate.

 

Not even close, that already tells me you haven't seen me do in depth scoring.

I actually factor in defense, that's the difference between me and many others here (Almost everyone else)

I do pro style scoring.

 

It's just that a lot of people don't know the categories of scoring and usually tend to be swayed by crowd reactions and damage.

That's the biggest concern.

 

I do like Mayweather as a fighter, but like I said already, defense is something you have to factor in. It's one of the four scoring categories. It doesn't matter how much you hate it, you gotta factor it in. If you don't, you're just invalidating your own scorecard.

Defense is so important.

 

I haven't really went back and did a thorough scoring of it yet, I think I may have had a 2 point lead for Ortiz after a non thorough skim. It's certainly not 7-2 or 8-1 for Ortiz like some people proclaim. Those are the people who don't factor in defensive work.

 

DEFENSIVE WORK and ring generalship. OMG!! He was also getting his fair share of punches in, and he wasn't getting clipped badly lol. People love to overstate Ortiz's dominance, which never happened