Just another thought experiment thread. If Mayweather had his same exact career, but his fights were being judged the way 1905 fights were judged, does his record change? How?
Mayweather would have adjusted his style somewhat appropriate to what the scoring criteria was, this probably means he wouldn't have had a career up to the age of 38, nor would he have fought olden day middleweights. Mayweather would have used clinching far more and would have gotten away with it.
He'd get more undefeated and would've been allowed to beat Manfredy half to death. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I dont think youd have to go back that far to have a few of Mayweather's fights scored against him. Castillo, DeLaHoya, Maidana x2 (yes, x2), maybe even Pacquiao. His fights with Judah, Cotto, and Alvarez may have been scored a good bit closer or maybe even. Maybe he would have been DQd against Ortiz or maybe it would have been a NC. Its hard to say, the world was very different many years ago. What is seen as impressive now may not have been seen as so impressive in those days... like just moving around without really fighting.
All of the ones that they won. Im talking about how a man shouldnt win a round if all he is doing is moving away and landing a few (not so hard) punches... when the other man is moving forward and throwing punches, sometimes landed and sometimes getting his opponent on the ropes or in the corners (sloppy or not, thats effective aggressiveness).
So I take it you don't know the rounds but how many rounds did you think they won in those fights? What if the more aggressive fighter fails to land any clean or meaningful blows? Do you score points for aggressive fighters landing punches to their opponents shoulders, arms, and gloves? Mayweather isn't a hard puncher at 147 but the punches he lands are harder and stiffer than you seem to realize-- he doesn't throw pitty-pat blows.
I can't speak for anyone but fights in 1905 were scored differently. Guys like an older Mayweather would be penalized for "not making the fight" or something.
I never said I thought Mayweather lost. Im saying that things were much different years ago... like the fact that a loud mouthed blackman wouldnt have the kind of power and influence that Mayweather enjoyed for most of his career. Racism is very real today, it was much worse years ago. As for punches on the shoulder, arm, top of the head... no, they should not count as much as a clean shot to the head or body. Those punches should be worth more than nothing though. If one guy is doing something, anything, and the other guy is basically just trying to avoid being in a fight... guess who Im giving the round to?
It's not only about finding potential losses in his record, but also No decisions, disqualifications, and the like. Which seemed to happen much more often back in the day, when it seems like there was a certain standard to earn yourself the W. I wonder if Mayweather would've been up to those standards.
I imagine Lomachenko would have taken more am loses if he had surprise pro judges. The style of judging for a fight directly influences how a fight is fought. Retrospectives are pointless. It's also why your personal scorecard is pointless if the fight has open-scoring, like in Canelo-Trout. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lomachenko would have adjusted his style to match the pro-scoring criteria. At the first couple of fights in his pro career, he actually had no clue what the pro-scoring criteria required and treated it like amateur bouts - all of this emphasises the point you made 'the style of judging for a fight directly influences how a fight is fought'. Lomachenko had to alter his style in the amateurs to master the amateur computer-scoring system and then the amateur precision scoring system.
