Pac/Floyd investigation, documented punches (disputed rounds) blow by blow

[Real King Kong]

[tangalog2200]

irrelevant?

now, that one above is most irrelevant on this thread...

pathetic ha ha ha

i am waiting....

[Real King Kong]

irrelevant?

now, that one above is most irrelevant on this thread...

pathetic ha ha ha

i am waiting....

It certainly is relevant lol. Like i said before, the purpose of this thread is trolling...deal with it.

[tangalog2200]

It certainly is relevant lol. Like i said before, the purpose of this thread is trolling...deal with it.

deal with it? trolling?

a very lame and shameful way of capitulation!

carry on, boy!

[Reloaded]

it is not about us making the rules as we as go along....

it is just about posters reviewing the video and commenting on or dis*****g it....as per the thread made...

you said i am only taking into account only half of the criteria....

so where's the other half? can you show me the official score cards where you can see the points awarded for the ring generalship? defense? effective aggression? fight control? etc etc....come on...i'm waiting...

It is in the scoring system we dont need to know the exact figure only thats its there and we also know it can be a major factor in scoring fights , the point is when the punch stats are at all close whoever dominated all those areas of scoring will win the fight .

[Rath]

We will get to the surface off a boxing match in due time we need to start deeper , when questioning the validy of any boxing match the first real question is what is being scored by each judge for Ring Generalship , Defense , Effective Aggression , Fight Control , fight control is winning the exchanges , controlling the pace and distance and containing the opponent into fighting your fight .

Now before we get to the landed grazed hard soft simple sht with the fight tell us what is awarded score for Ring Generalship , Defence , Effective Aggression and Fight Control .

Dont evade it answer it .

.

you evade my question.

it was a very simple question.

answer my question first then i answer yours.

[Zaroku]

Isnt this thread about scoring the fight to determine the winner ?

How the fck can you score the fight when you are only taking into account half the criteria ? , you expect people to debate it and you people make the rules as you go along , its a very simple question and its as much involved in scoring as punch stats .

Ok if you cant estimate for judges you can surely answer for yourself , so you answer the question .

If a fight is close in punch stats , what score do you give a guy for Ring Generalship , Defense , Effective Aggression , Fight Control .

I agree we can't put ourselves in the judges seats, so we do have to judge for ourselves.
1. Ring Generalship:
2. Defense
3. Effective Agression
4. Fight Control

Now we need to come up with definitions for each. Our interpretations will vary.

When Napoleon fought Russia, he was extremely aggressive, the Russian army decided where and when to fight, they gave ground pulling the French army deeper and deeper into Russia. The Russians retreated, fought, and burned their own cities so Napolean would not be able to find food for his army in towns they chose not to defend. The Russians knew the longer the fighting went, the weaker Napoleon would be. Napoleon started with 930,000 men, but got worn out and had to retreat with less than 20,00 survivors.

My point is this, just because a guy can fight backing up, decides when to fight, and when not to fight, doesn't mean he is not in command of the ring. Which brings up effective Agression.

I leave it to others on this thread to decide what constitutes Effective Agression
Agression Nullification by defense and or timed offense.

[tangalog2200]

It is in the scoring system we dont need to know the exact figure only thats its there and we also know it can be a major factor in scoring fights , the point is when the punch stats are at all close whoever dominated all those areas of scoring will win the fight .

"It is in the scoring system we dont need to know"

but, but, but...was it not you who was asking for these? ha ha ha!

[tangalog2200]

I agree we can't put ourselves in the judges seats, so we do have to judge for ourselves.
1. Ring Generalship:
2. Defense
3. Effective Agression
4. Fight Control

Now we need to come up with definitions for each. Our interpretations will vary.

When Napoleon fought Russia, he was extremely aggressive, the Russian army decided where and when to fight, they gave ground pulling the French army deeper and deeper into Russia. The Russians retreated, fought, and burned their own cities so Napolean would not be able to find food for his army in towns they chose not to defend. The Russians knew the longer the fighting went, the weaker Napoleon would be. Napoleon started with 930,000 men, but got worn out and had to retreat with less than 20,00 survivors.

My point is this, just because a guy can fight backing up, decides when to fight, and when not to fight, doesn't mean he is not in command of the ring. Which brings up effective Agression.

I leave it to others on this thread to decide what constitutes Effective Agression
Agression Nullification by defense and or timed offense.

but, but, but according to reloaded we don't need to know....

[Rath]

that is where you stumble......

judges? scoring parameters used by judges?

do you understand what you are trying to do here?

three judges may even have different and/or contradicting verdict on a given fight!

or do you just can not dispute what you now see in the video....

the video is just a slow mo version of what transpired and you should not have difficulties commenting on it or dis*****g it....

just a simple video.....versus 3 judges who you can not even tell what they have for lunch or dinner before the fight....

and discuss what's on their mind regarding generalship, control defense etc etc...

this is where he is going to wreck his slow mo mind trying to wrap his brain to comprehend it.

judges scoring differently in a given round is common, given that they each have a different angle and view of the ring, and the way the each have different style of judging.

what is not common and unheard of are 3 judges scoring all 8 rounds and two judges scored all 12 rounds identically the same.in a pick em fight where most if not all agrees that those 8 rounds have 4 or more rounds that could go either way.

surprisingly or not surprisingly as i have mentioned before,

when they say that the a particular round is so close to score and it may go either way, you know what happens?

it always went Floyd's way 100 percent of it.