The complete, extremely detailed guide how to score a fight properly (~30 mins)

Clean effective punching.

 

This content is protected

Please define clean and effective punching for me.

When your punches do almost zilch to your opponent's face?

 

Agreed. And if there is no clear distinction between the two fighters in this regard only then do we start considering other factors.

A weak argument. Some fighters bruise and mark easier than others. Look at Marquez's face after he fought MAB, and that was a fight he won. Even I managed to score that fight JMM and I'm a ridiculous MAB dick rider.

 

**** off, pacmans lip was busted up. A picutre or facial damage don't mean ****.

Some people's skin might be more prone to cuts or damage, amd other might have elephant type skin where bruising and damage don't show.

Facial damage doesn't equate to clean punching.

 

I strongly disagree Addie. This is for all:

With a pair of good eyes following the rule of clean effective punching, 99% of the rounds can be properly awarded to one fighter, otherwise it should be a draw

- If there is nothing to separate the two, who cares who was coming forward, boxing has many styles, some come forward, some fight off the ropes, some moves around
- Who cares who threw more, sweet science is not about trowing but landing, if no difference at landing, why insist on finding a winner?
- Who cares about 'effective aggression' - clean effective punching should cover that, no need complicate your own life
- Who cares about TV stats - it's about quality of shots landing, you have your own pair of eyes
- Who cares who looks worse

99% of the time clean effective (successful) punching decides the outcome of the round, every other time it should be a draw, because there isn't successful punching action to separate the two.

 

We'll agree to disagree.

 

We should not. If you set extra rules for your scoring you'll soon start looking at who comes forward, who opens up more, who gets the crowd cheering, commentator back-up etc., one thing comes after another.

Action is too fast to split your attention, focus 100% on the sole rule that matters, and you'll find an even round extremely rare - and that's when you score a draw. Everything else coming into play creates the illusion that 'scoring is subjective' when it is not, at least it should not be.

Clean effective punching with a pair of good eyes covers everything. The draw is there for the very occasion you can't separate the two.

 

We'll agree to disagree. Cheers lad.

But yeah, on a serious note, I do quite like your idea of how to score a fight better than mine. I don't think the judges will be likely to score fights in the same manner, but the next time I sit down to score a fight I'll adopt your method. Clean effective punching, and if there is no clear distinction in that regard then score it even. Nice and easy.

 

Elephant skin usually applies to black fighters (the black coloring hides most of it). Pac was visibly marked up by Clottey, Cotto, and Margarito. In the first 2 fights, both guys wore masks of horror by the final bell. And Pac's lip wasn't busted up. His gums bled from the impact of a punch. And that stopped. If Marquez's punches were that clean and effective, it would have ****ed up Pac's face.

I mean, the argument is that Marquez teed off at will ALL NIGHT LONG.

 

Thats what matters the most. It seems that Willie Pep could never win a round without throwing a punch if Lederman is scoring.
When you throw 40 punches and land only 6...How is that effective agression ? For all i care the opponents throws 10 and lands 4.
Of course there is the power aspect. Marquez made Pacquiao headbang, something that Marquez never had to do.

 

Compubox was wrong. Pacman did not land anything on Marquez.
Here is the evidence.

This content is protected

 

Nice and easy! :happy


Take 'ring generalship' and 'effective aggression' into play, and the quick, slick, sneaky styled Mijares/DeGale automatically loses a close round, when with 100% attention on clean effective punching, you could recognize their better work when they outdo the opponent. Take Alexander-Kotelnik, if you do focus on the successful punching you'll find 9 rather confident rounds to give to Kotelnik and 3 to Alexander. But when a Rafael credits 'effective aggression' 'output' and 'ring generalship', it is easy to get to his 116-112 Alexander score or whatever it was. But his scoring criteria is flawed, because he made it 'subjective' giving up the most important rule to favor others.

Boxing is about hit and not get hit, therefor only factors that should could are those that helps separating who did a better job at it - output does not tell the stroy - coming forward does not the the story - TV stats don't tell the story - clean effective punching solely tells the story of the fight.

 

Dont bump this pos thread pls.atsch

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl dumbass

This content is protected

Clottey