Round scoring

Show me where this "how close are you to winning the fight" stuff is in any rulebook or any scoring guide.

:blood

 

I've been told that before. However, I would still tend towards giving the guy who scored the KD a 10-8 round.


I scored the first round of Calzaghe-Hopkins 10-8 for Bernard, even though I believe he won the two minutes before the KD and the 45 seconds after it as well.

 

That one is fair enough because it wasn't like Calzaghe was dominating other than the KD. 99% of judges will score that kind of round 10-8.

 

So far, that's you, me, and Neverchair.

Larry Holmes KO1 Anybody :hey

 

i score the round based on the number of punches..i score clean light punches as .33 or .5 depending on power of the punch. then hard bombs as 1 point. it is normal that one hard punch is followed by another hard bomb. so thats already 2 points for me in just one second.

some judges opted to just look for the best punch of the round and give the round to the fighter the connects the hardest punch.

that case 10 light vs 3 hard, it almost equal. rounds which have a 1 point difference im my scorecard, i usually give to the favored fighter. there are instances where is give close rounds on the hometown guy despite being the underdog like john vs juarez

 

I'm guessing you mean the Kellerman "who would you rather be at the end of the round" criterion, but that's like judging the 12th round by who hams it up more to the crowd after the final bell.

No man is dumb enough to get slappy with Tyson. He'd flash back to Robin Givens and bite Joe's nose off.

Slightly more serious, the "hard punches" we're asked to consider are ones that simply make the head snap, i.e. one of those highlight shots where the water sprays off the recipient's hair. No knockdowns, much less a chicken dance and informing the ref on the dangers of lit matches.

So don't think of the three punches as bombs; try picturing a stiff jab or an uppercut while clinching, instead.

No, thank you! I'm not going to get the image of Calzaghe v. Tyson out of my head for quite a while...

 

If you're saying they don't daze or stun the light puncher of the two, then I would lean towards scoring it to the guy who landed most.

In practice though, I think there are always other things to take into account like who is controlling the pace and executing their plan most effectively.

 

offense should be the first thing a judge would look, ring generalship must be considered if the rounds are close

 

I think I'd actually want to see the round personally. I'll admit I'm not that good at judging yet, but I'd be leaning towards B as more effective punching. Watching it for real might change my opinion though.

 

clener, harder punching. See Toney v Jirov, I didn't have it that close, bout 4 points clear.

 

I'd score it on who did the most damage. That makes one hurtful bomb a lot better than several pitty-pat punches.

And yes, B-Hop did beat Calslappy.

 

if you hit me 10 times and i walk through them and i bust you up with 3..i beat your ass