Who knows better how to score a boxing match?

[aboutfkntime]

Nobody is trying to remove any of those things. What we are saying is punches landed is the #1 factor in determining who wins rounds. Now if you have issues with what type of punches that's fine. That can be debated. What should be obvious to you is that the tools of the trade are a fighter's hands. He uses them to land punches. Pointing out that landed punches are are paramount isn't ignoring other aspects of boxing. That fact doesn't seem to penetrate into your tiny little brain.

you already PROVED that you have no idea how to score a fight

YOU said defence, ring generalship, and effective aggression..... are not a valid scoring factor unless the number of landed punches happen to be even.....

which is absolute fkn rubbish Tony Baloney, you are an IDIOT

you LITERALLY attempted to remove defence, ring generalship, and effective aggression..... as official scoring criteria

your foolishness is clearly apparent..... as usual LMAO

EVERYBODY knows that clean HARD punching is the primary criteria

once again kid..... punches landed are NOT official scoring criteria, clean hard punching is..... just like it says in the official rules you dumbass casual-fan.....


Steve Weisfeld says.....


[IMG]//media3.*****.com/media/33bpFN25l6qNW/*****.gif[/IMG]

[Robbie Barrett]

This thread has to be fail of the year. TS thinking he's got one over another poster by using Weisfeld to back up his theory that Golovkin beat Canelo, not knowing that Weisfeld was an official judge and scored it for Canelo.