casual fans need to learn how to score a fight.....

[boliodogs]

GGGtards get in here and learn how to score a fight and not buy into the network's agenda

GGG got a draw and a razor thin split decision loss in Canelo loving Vegas on an Oscar promoted show with paid off judges. That means he won both fights, Canelotard.

[Boxing_1013]

Since I've seen many people reference the GGG-Canelo fights...those fights are actually great examples of people finding any way possible to score the fight for 'their' fighter, even if no real case for that win is to be found.

When you fight someone twice, and you get outlanded in almost every round of the 24, and have perhaps 0 rounds where you outland your opponent (by multiple...3 4 5 punches) AND also land the bigger punch/punches of the round, it is safe to say you are the loser in both fights.

How anyone can score those fights other than clear wins for GGG (not to say Canelo wasn't competitive, especially in fight 2) is not so much head scratching, but rather illustrative that many people will find a way to score for their guy in a fight that goes 12 rounds.

I can safely say that if Canelo fought GGG's fight, and vice versa, I would have two clear wins for Canelo on my books. I unfortunately feel like many people who claim Canelo won wouldn't do the same...they would likely say Canelo won 11-1 in fight 1 and 10-2 in fight 2.

People who will find any way to score it for their fighter, or against another fighter, are unfortunately not to be taken seriously as far as boxing analysis and scoring of fights goes. I appreciate their passion and love for the sport though...they are just a little too blinded to be neutral.

[TonyGe]

I would need to watch the round

what happened to the 80% that missed..... ?

* in Teddy's voice *
(typed in bold, to simulate Teddy's passion)

the 40 missiles that missed..... WHY DID THEY MISS..... ?

was the gunner drunk..... or was he shooting at an antelope ?

an antelope who knew the missile was coming..... ?

HOW WAS THE ANTELOPE ABLE TO BE SO ACCURATE, IN THE FACE OF THAT BARRAGE..... ?

was he like a sniper, who toyed with his victim?..... or did he only fire when cornered, just to facilitate a lucky escape..... only to jump back on his bike and miraculously escape unscathed?

or..... (still, in Teddy's voice).....

HOW DID THEY MISS..... ?

did they miss wildly, only to be followed by a counter?..... did they hit gloves, air, arms, shoulders, what?..... did they fall short?..... HOW DID THEY MISS..... ?

which fighter looked better in the corner following that round..... the guy who landed 5 clean shots while facing a barrage of missiles, or the guy who blew his load for very little result.....?

/Teddy

I would need to watch the round man, same as anyone else

THAT is why you cannot use compubox to score a fight

THAT is why you guys need to give professional judges a break

you are not there... you are not trained... and you are not experienced

the absurd outrage from casuals following Golovkin/Canelo II and Ward/Kovalev II has been ridiculous

forget the first fight, both them dudes got handled in the rematch

like I said earlier..... people who use the word robbery, for EITHER of those rematches, and even for the first Canelo/Golovkin fight..... have identified themselves as dumb casuals by their own whining

you guys will not admit that Golovkin fell short of expectations

I expected him to KO Canelo but he didn't. That doesn't mean he lost the fight A lot of Canelo supporters were claiming he would knock out Golovkin especially since he bragged that he would. That doesn't mean he lost the fight. Expectations mean nothing when the two fighters get in the ring. Falling short of expectations is irrelevant. Sometimes expectations are unrealistic. Having said that Golovkin won both fights. The first fight was a clear robbery as stated by Paulie, Teddy Atlas and the fans. The second fight was closer but as Paulie said a robbery is a robbery even if it's only by a couple of rounds. Teddy remarked after the second fight since when is a jab not a scoring punch.

[aboutfkntime]

Just I know where you two are coming from here, please answer this question:

Fighter A throws 50 punches in a round, and lands 10 of them cleanly,

Fighter B throws just 5 punches, but they all land cleanly.

Neither fighter visibly hurts, wobbles, or knocks down the other.

Who won that round .. fighter A (20% connect rate) or fighter B (100% connect rate) ???

Fighter B wins that round, here is why....

you think that defense is not a factor unless both fighters appear to land the same number of clean punches..... which is totally incorrect

the reason why Fighter B wins that round, is because..... not only is defence a valid factor in judging how a fight unfolds, right alongside (or just under) clean hard punching..... so is effective aggression and ring generalship.....

without knowing more details on how the round unfolded, or watching it..... which is absolutely critical, to the point where it really is silly to attempt to make a call.....

(10-point-must)

* clean hard punching.....
Fighter A - 10
Fighter B - 10

* effective aggression.....
Fighter A - 9
Fighter B -10

* defence.....
Fighter A - 9
Fighter B -10

* ring generalship
Fighter A - 9
Fighter B -10

Fighter B wins the criteria 40-37..... and the round 10-9

but yea, without watching the round unfold it is impossible to make a realistic decision..... also, I am not a professional boxing judge, or even close

all I am saying is this.....

FORGET ever using the good ol... " but, 90% of the fans say "..... because, 90% of the fans DKSAB

MOST score by their perception (whatever that may be) of landed punches..... which is not only flawed logic, it is likely inaccurate anyway

most have no idea whatsoever why Golovkin " forgot " to go to the body in either of those fights..... so most have no idea why that is a telling factor in both of those decisions

the judges are experienced, they know what to expect..... from Canelo, and from Golovkin..... so they absolutely did wonder just how effective is Golovkin's aggression, if he is not able to employ his trademark bodywork?..... and they absolutely did wonder if the total lack of a concentrated body-attack by Golovkin had anything to do with how sharp, CLEAN, and HARD, Canelo's counters were

and they absolutely factored in the total lack of a concentrated body-attack by Golovkin when considering ring generalship..... they knew what Canelo was doing

THAT is why Roy Jones screamed at Team Golovkin for not fighting Canelo like Mexican.....

"y'all said he ran, but YOU RAN.... you think the judges don't see that"

the casuals bashed Roy for that comment..... but, he knows the game way better than they do

[Boxing_1013]

I would need to watch the round

what happened to the 80% that missed..... ?

* in Teddy's voice *
(typed in bold, to simulate Teddy's passion)

the 40 missiles that missed..... WHY DID THEY MISS..... ?

was the gunner drunk..... or was he shooting at an antelope ?

an antelope who knew the missile was coming..... ?

HOW WAS THE ANTELOPE ABLE TO BE SO ACCURATE, IN THE FACE OF THAT BARRAGE..... ?

was he like a sniper, who toyed with his victim?..... or did he only fire when cornered, just to facilitate a lucky escape..... only to jump back on his bike and miraculously escape unscathed?

or..... (still, in Teddy's voice).....

HOW DID THEY MISS..... ?

did they miss wildly, only to be followed by a counter?..... did they hit gloves, air, arms, shoulders, what?..... did they fall short?..... HOW DID THEY MISS..... ?

which fighter looked better in the corner following that round..... the guy who landed 5 clean shots while facing a barrage of missiles, or the guy who blew his load for very little result.....?

/Teddy

I would need to watch the round man, same as anyone else

THAT is why you cannot use compubox to score a fight

THAT is why you guys need to give professional judges a break

you are not there... you are not trained... and you are not experienced

the absurd outrage from casuals following Golovkin/Canelo II and Ward/Kovalev II has been ridiculous

forget the first fight, both them dudes got handled in the rematch

like I said earlier..... people who use the word robbery, for EITHER of those rematches, and even for the first Canelo/Golovkin fight..... have identified themselves as dumb casuals by their own whining

you guys will not admit that Golovkin fell short of expectations

As long as we are channeling Teddy Atlas...he said GGG won 8-3-1 in the 2nd fight..which coincidentally coincides with Compubox punch stats for the fight - for the record, not that I always agree with compubox, but usually they help to tell the story and pretty much were on it in both GGG-Canelo fights, according to my own punch stats.

Canelo fought OK in the 1st fight and had some impressive things about him...and was quite impressive in fight 2 in many ways...but he still was getting outlanded almost every round, often times getting hit as big as he would hit GGG, and that's just the way boxing matches are scored my friend. Love your passion for the sport though.

[Boxing_1013]

the absurd outrage from casuals following Golovkin/Canelo II and Ward/Kovalev II has been ridiculous

forget the first fight, both them dudes got handled in the rematch

like I said earlier..... people who use the word robbery, for EITHER of those rematches, and even for the first Canelo/Golovkin fight..... have identified themselves as dumb casuals by their own whining

Bro - Kov-Ward 2 and GGG-Canelo 2 had basically the same punch stats round by round as the first fights...which were clear victories for GGG and Kov. Great fighters can adapt, but usually if you can't do it over 12 rounds, the next 12 rounds are usually more of the same.

Both 2nd fights were closer though...Ward was doing better through the first 7 rounds, but was still was getting outboxed. I have no real opinion on the 8th round (and the low shots prior) because I feel Kov should have handled it better but it was certainly controversial.

Canelo did a lot better in fight 2 but it's still a game of hit and don't get hit. And Canelo got out-hit in almost every round again, with each guy doing more or less the same damage per punch.

I don't really care about the robberies because Canelo is the money man so to beat him you have to kill him, but yeah those fights were not really hard to score or very close. Kov-Ward 1 was the worst robbery of all though.

The only fight were I think it is fair to have a difference of opinion on what exactly the outcome should have been is Ward-Kov 2. My 2 cents anyway, from watching lots and lots of boxing.

[TonyGe]

Fighter B wins that round, here is why....

you think that defense is not a factor unless both fighters appear to land the same number of clean punches..... which is totally incorrect

the reason why Fighter B wins that round, is because..... not only is defence a valid factor in judging how a fight unfolds, right alongside (or just under) clean hard punching..... so is effective aggression and ring generalship.....

without knowing more details on how the round unfolded, or watching it..... which is absolutely critical, to the point where it really is silly to attempt to make a call.....

(10-point-must)

* clean hard punching.....
Fighter A - 10
Fighter B - 10

* effective aggression.....
Fighter A - 9
Fighter B -10

* defence.....
Fighter A - 9
Fighter B -10

* ring generalship
Fighter A - 9
Fighter B -10

Fighter B wins the criteria 40-37..... and the round 10-9

but yea, without watching the round unfold it is impossible to make a realistic decision..... also, I am not a professional boxing judge, or even close

all I am saying is this.....

FORGET ever using the good ol... " but, 90% of the fans say "..... because, 90% of the fans DKSAB

MOST score by their perception (whatever that may be) of landed punches..... which is not only flawed logic, it is likely inaccurate anyway

most have no idea whatsoever why Golovkin " forgot " to go to the body in either of those fights..... so most have no idea why that is a telling factor in both of those decisions

the judges are experienced, they know what to expect..... from Canelo, and from Golovkin..... so they absolutely did wonder just how effective is Golovkin's aggression, if he is not able to employ his trademark bodywork?..... and they absolutely did wonder if the total lack of a concentrated body-attack by Golovkin had anything to do with how sharp, CLEAN, and HARD, Canelo's counters were

and they absolutely factored in the total lack of a concentrated body-attack by Golovkin when considering ring generalship..... they knew what Canelo was doing

THAT is why Roy Jones screamed at Team Golovkin for not fighting Canelo like Mexican.....

"y'all said he ran, but YOU RAN.... you think the judges don't see that"

the casuals bashed Roy for that comment..... but, he knows the game way better than they do

Thanks for the analysis but you are wrong. The fighter that lands the most punches in that example given clearly won the round. When a fighter gets doubled up in clean landed punches there is no justification for him winning the round.

[Bobby Deez]

It's true. You got a bunch of motha****as on here that say a fighter won because they liked the color of their trunks n' shit.

[aboutfkntime]

Guys...fellas...my friends....the only thing that matters in scoring a boxing match is 1) who is landing more punches, and the better punches. Come on this is basic stuff fellas. The other stuff not only has nothing to do with scoring a fight...it is also much more subjective than punch count and damage.

This means it would be bad to rely on those factors in scoring a fight - people can make a case (often times a bad one) that fighter A is 'being the ring general' or 'has better defense' even if he is clearly losing and getting out-landed. It is hard to legitimately argue against punch counts and punch effectiveness. And again - a boxing match is 100% about who is landing more and better punches.

As an example - Fury's shoe-shining in the (primarily first 6 rounds) Wilder fight did not give him a 10-2 victory. In most of the early rounds Fury would outland Wilder about 8-6...with many times Wilder getting the best punch or punches of the round. Those were even rounds, and with Wilder getting 2 KDs in the last 6 rounds (where Fury imo was outboxing him handily) led to a close fight round by round.

Honestly I don't mind Canelo fans trying to rationalize him winning either GGG fight - Canelo's fans run this sport in a way because they are the money behind it. So if they want to convince themselves Canelo won fights he didn't win...it is not a huge deal.

But if we are keeping it real on here...those two GGG-Canelo fights were easy to score. Fight 1 Canelo was fairly competitive in the first 3 rounds, and the last 3 rounds. Splitting those 3-3 was probably the right way t do it. GGG was clearly the better man in rounds 4-9 and probably deserved 5-1 in those 6 rounds. 8-4 for GGG.

When you get outlanded in almost every round, I suppose it becomes necessary for some hardcore fans to try and rationalize their guy winning, but again Canelo got outlanded in 10-11 rounds (1 tie) in the first GGG fight, with Canelo hardly having any 'big-punch moments.' If the fight were reversed, I would say GGG was lucky to get 4 rounds, and it's pretty easy to say that for Canelo here.

Fight 2 Canelo was much better and held the center of the ring better. Even though Canelo again got outlanded in 8-11 rounds (1 tie), he had some rounds where he quite clearly had the better combo or punch of the round. The first 5 rounds were a good example of this...GGG clearly outlanding Canelo, but Canelo landing the better punch or combo. Naturally these are close rounds and splitting them is almost always best practice.

GGG did have 2 clear rounds in the first five rounds - 4,5 - and I feel 4-2 after 6 for GGG was the best score. Outlanded Canelo in probably every round (round 6 was close by my count - I disagree with compubox numbers which had Canelo ahead there)...but Canelo had some better moments in those rounds.

Rounds 7 and 8 were close...split them. Rounds 9 10 and 11 were clear GGG rounds...round 12 was tight but I shade it to Canelo usually since it was all over on the cards at that point anyway.

Moral of the story - when you are outlanding your opponent in almost every round, and often times are landing the bigger shots in those rounds, you are almost certainly clearly winning the fight. Some people unfortunately seem to need to inject other criteria into fights like this, to try and make a case for their fighter winning. Again - fights are scored by who is landing more, and better, punches. Come on guys, that is obvious, we should be able to agree on that.

this is professional boxing, not rock-em-sock-em robots

before you completely eliminate 3-of-the-4 official scoring criteria (LMAO)..... please realize that we are not interested in butchering the sweet science, just to make it easier for casual-fans to score a fight

sorry..... but, defence and ring generalship are part of this game, whether you like it or not..... and ineffective aggression even gets rock-em-sock-em robots into trouble

just try harder

go watch that video..... 1000x

listen, jokes aside..... boxing caters for everyone, simply watch lower-level fights..... fights that are not that technical or difficult to judge

[aboutfkntime]

I expected him to KO Canelo but he didn't. That doesn't mean he lost the fight A lot of Canelo supporters were claiming he would knock out Golovkin especially since he bragged that he would. That doesn't mean he lost the fight. Expectations mean nothing when the two fighters get in the ring. Falling short of expectations is irrelevant. Sometimes expectations are unrealistic. Having said that Golovkin won both fights. The first fight was a clear robbery as stated by Paulie, Teddy Atlas and the fans. The second fight was closer but as Paulie said a robbery is a robbery even if it's only by a couple of rounds. Teddy remarked after the second fight since when is a jab not a scoring punch.

when the jab is not clean/hard/effective

look, right here in the rules..... the, " official " rules....

* clean hard punching
* effective aggression
* defence
* ring generalship

Tony Baloney..... up until a few days ago, you VEHEMENTLY insisted that the ONLY criteria for scoring a boxing match was adding up the landed punches..... you said that many times, on many threads

the "how to score a boxing match for beginners" video in this thread..... I LITERALLY found that video on youtube to prove you wrong on the other thread LMAO

you are actually the cause of this thread, you muppet