Who knows better how to score a boxing match?

[Robbie Barrett]

You are describing something other than boxing my friend. This is not dancing, not styling, not shoe-shining...this is hit and not get hit. That is boxing...take it from a top boxing judge...and every boxing judge he has ever talked to.

That anyone would argue different is strange. Makes sense in a way though because some opinions on this site are a little strange imo.

"But let's remember the purpose of the sport: to land punches on your opponent."

Steve Weisfeld

"Hit and not get hit", but you don't want to score the not get hit part.

[Boxing_1013]

ABC Regulatory guidelines.

Scoring criteria

The scoring shall be done on a TEN POINT must system. Judges are to score each round using the following scoring criteria:

1. Clean punching (power versus quantity).

2. Effective aggressiveness.

3. Ring generalship.

4. Defense.



Defence is scoring criteria. End thread/

Steve Weisfeld:

"Clean punches: To me, clean punches are the most important aspect, and the other factors are really tied to that. Take the phrase, "effective aggressiveness." How is a boxer effective? He's effective by landing clean punches. How about "defense?" A boxer shows great defense by not getting hit with clean punches. And, finally, the term "ring generalship." A boxer uses the ring to put himself in a position to land clean punches."

[Robbie Barrett]

Steve Weisfeld:

"Clean punches: To me, clean punches are the most important aspect, and the other factors are really tied to that. Take the phrase, "effective aggressiveness." How is a boxer effective? He's effective by landing clean punches. How about "defense?" A boxer shows great defense by not getting hit with clean punches. And, finally, the term "ring generalship." A boxer uses the ring to put himself in a position to land clean punches."

I posted the rules, you posted an opinion.

FACTS>>>Opinions

[Boxing_1013]

"Hit and not get hit", but you don't want to score the not get hit part.

.... well I guess you do 'score' not getting hit...as in your opponent not getting points for that man. That's where good defense helps my friend. Lol come on.

Steve Weisfeld:

"But let's remember the purpose of the sport: to land punches on your opponent."

[Boxing_1013]

I posted the rules, you posted an opinion.

FACTS>>>Opinions

I posted the opinion of a top judge in the sport...who says every other judge he met agrees with him...about how to interpret scoring a fight...and how the other criteria you mentioned are only valid insofar as they allow a fighter to land punches on the opponent. All those things help a guy land...and that's what boxing is my friend.

See my sig regarding Weisfeld my friend...if you think you know more about boxing than him then

[Robbie Barrett]

.... well I guess you do 'score' not getting hit...as in your opponent not getting points for that man. That's where good defense helps my friend. Lol come on.

Steve Weisfeld:

"But let's remember the purpose of the sport: to land punches on your opponent."

When a fighter prevents an opponent from landing punches he gets credit for it. Not anywhere near as important as landing punches but it's a scoring criteria.

[llll]

You are describing something other than boxing my friend. This is not dancing, not styling, not shoe-shining...this is hit and not get hit. That is boxing...take it from a top boxing judge...and every boxing judge he has ever talked to.

That anyone would argue different is strange. Makes sense in a way though because some opinions on this site are a little strange imo.

"But let's remember the purpose of the sport: to land punches on your opponent."

Steve Weisfeld

Only a ret4rd scores a round for defense. If you make an opponent miss 300 punches, and he lands 50, and you only threw 40, and landed 20, the other guy won the round. He did more damage than you.

What good did your defense do you whem the other guy landed nore punches.

[Robbie Barrett]

I posted the opinion of a top judge in the sport...who says every other judge he met agrees with him...about how to interpret scoring a fight...and how the other criteria you mentioned are only valid insofar as they allow a fighter to land punches on the opponent. All those things help a guy land...and that's what boxing is my friend.

See my sig regarding Weisfeld my friend...if you think you know more about boxing than him then

That's his opinion. Only his. Unless he wants to validate his claims of other judges.

If you have an even round of punches landed then you look at other criteria to score the round, like defence.

[Boxing_1013]

When a fighter prevents an opponent from landing punches he gets credit for it. Not anywhere near as important as landing punches but it's a scoring criteria.

I mean I just think avoiding punches is only important insofar as you are not allowing your opponent to score...boxing is about who is landing more and better punches...that's all it is...why people are making it out to be anything else is really odd tbh.

Weisfeld again:

"Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense. Most judges that I have spoken to do not give credit for defense alone. If a boxer has a good defense, it means that he is not being hit with punches. But let's remember the purpose of the sport: to land punches on your opponent."

[Robbie Barrett]

Only a ret4rd scores a round for defense. If you make an opponent miss 300 punches, and he lands 50, and you only threw 40, and landed 20, the other guy won the round. He did more damage than you.

What good did your defense do you whem the other guy landed nore punches.

Nobody is claiming that. Punches are more important.

But if the punches are equal then defence comes in to scoring.