How To Score A Fight

Panic E

Said I'd share this here as a few of us are planning to score the MayPac replay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHnEva3lC9Y

The 4 official criteria for scoring a fight as it's applies to any professional bout:

1. Clean Punching

“Blows delivered that are easily discernable, that inflict perceptible damage, and that land without any unanticipated difficulty or interference.”

2. Effective Aggression

“A hostile or forceful behavior designed to create a desired or intended result. Being aggressive gives the impression of dominance.”

3. Ring Generalship

"The fighter who controls the action and enforces his will with good footwork, agility, feinting, or other tactical advantages."

4. Defence

"Defense may include ducking, dodging, bobbing and weaving, parrying, blocking, slipping, and sidestepping."

25% is awarded to each. Or as Harold said, give the round to whoever did the most damage (clean punching). :pac:


http://coolmaterial.com/feature/how-to-score-a-boxing-match/

efb

Some need to be more aware of the above

Panic E

It's very subjective in any case.

Panic E

Yep, those are just some short definitions I gave. There are longer and different interpretations, feel free to add any further definitions and contributions

Panic E

pac_man wrote: »

What score had you got Mayweather Pacman?

I haven't scored the fight (yet)

efb

I scored it live and I stand over my score.

I find some try to score the fight as a whole- which isn't how its done, its each round, submitted at the end of each round, independent of all others.

Chileanwine

I think it's much simpler to just look at who lands the best and most punches.

Panic E

efb wrote: »

I scored it live and I stand over my score.

What was your score?

efb wrote: »

I find some try to score the fight as a whole- which isn't how its done, its each round, submitted at the end of each round, independent of all others.

Once the fight is over it's no harm doing that, we all do it. Firstly I suppose as a case for a rematch, wether people were happy with the fight

Secondly from a historical perspective- did it live up to our expectations, was it controversial and were there unknown factors at play on the night

Sometimes the judge's scorecards have no basis in reality and the fight is later noted as such (Pacquiao-Bradley 1 and Mayweather-Castillo 1 e.g.)

FTA69

Give it a rest. Pacquiao lost because he wasn't good enough.

efb

116-112 Mayweather points

Floyd really is the master, so skillful

[Report!]

walshb

efb wrote: »

116-112 Mayweather points

Floyd really is the master, so skillful

[Report!]

At defense I assume you mean? When most of your fight is based on not wanting to get hit then it's not as masterful as it seems.

Masterful to me was his Coralles win or Gatti win. Above masterful. Sheer amazement! The other night was a stinker from Floyd.

HigginsJ

FTA69 wrote: »

Give it a rest. Pacquiao lost because he wasn't good enough.

There are 3 threads open about this awful fight now. It's a bigger nonsense than the actual fight at this point. People just need to let it go, I hope to god there isn't a rematch at any stage in the future.

Lol, 4 threads now.

The only logical conclusion is that Panic E is actually Manny Pacquiao or Freddie Roach.

Panic E

Haha, thanks. This thread wasn't about Manny Pacquiao it's about how to score a fight.

pikeman99

The fight was actually a lot closer than many people presume. The compubox stats have been proven wrong, go over the fight round by round and you'll see that mayweather made it look like he won easily, it was much much closer than it looked.

walshb

pikeman99 wrote: »

The fight was actually a lot closer than many people presume. The compubox stats have been proven wrong, go over the fight round by round and you'll see that mayweather made it look like he won easily, it was much much closer than it looked.

It was, and several including Lomachenko/Holmes/Mosley and Holyfield had Manny the winner. That is why Manny was so surprised looking. It was his easiest night's work (toughness wise) in a long time. He barely took a clean punch the whole night. Not once did his head even snap back. The compu box stats are always going differ depending on who is statting' them. I don't pay too much attention to them. I rather trust my own eyes, and for me, it was a dreadfully poor offensive show from Floyd.

BTW, I don't think Mayweather made it look like he won easily. For me he didn't win it at all easily. A draw or close close win for either man is what I would have had it. The biggest single influence that night was the horrendous and OTT Floyd ass licking by Sky and its commentary team.

Talib Fiasco

To be fair it wasn't just Sky licking Floyd. The HBO/Showtime crew were the exact same, particularly Lampley who's been always a massive fan of Manny...but he's fake enough anyway. I really got the impression that they all expected Manny to miraculously KO a guy who's taken some savage punches, albeit few....but that Mosley punch in particular would drop most guys regardless of weight....but yeah he has only been dropped once, even though it wasn't given. Floyd may not get hit a lot at all...but his chin is rock solid. Even the shot he KO'd Hatton with prolly wouldn't have dropped Floyd.

walshb

Talib Fiasco wrote: »

To be fair it wasn't just Sky licking Floyd. The HBO/Showtime crew were the exact same, particularly Lampley who's been always a massive fan of Manny...but he's fake enough anyway. I really got the impression that they all expected Manny to miraculously KO a guy who's taken some savage punches, albeit few....but that Mosley punch in particular would drop most guys regardless of weight....but yeah he has only been dropped once, even though it wasn't given. Floyd may not get hit a lot at all...but his chin is rock solid. Even the shot he KO'd Hatton with prolly wouldn't have dropped Floyd.

The Mosely shot was a good shot, but nothing extraordinary. Floyd actually rode part of the shot. He was badly hurt by it for split seconds. Maidana had Floyd really wobbled with a decent right hand counter at the end of rd 4 I think. It was a good shot, not great, and Floyd was very unsteady looking.

I am not saying Floyd doesn't have a good chin, but it hasn't ever been consistently tested due to him being so defensive and fast with his reflexes. It's like saying a boxer has a steel chin just because he has not been stopped or dropped, yet he hasn't taken any real dingers in the first place. He took a couple of real good shots v.s Corley if memory serves me. That was at 140 I think.

hawkeyethenoo

mayweather was the better man on the night, it was a poor fight manny just couldn't land on floyd, floyd didn't do alot but he landed more and was just too sharp on the night. really can't make a case for pacman winning that fight, sure he was trying but without success.

walshb

hawkeyethenoo wrote: »

mayweather was the better man on the night, it was a poor fight manny just couldn't land on floyd, floyd didn't do alot but he landed more and was just too sharp on the night. really can't make a case for pacman winning that fight, sure he was trying but without success.

So many ways to look at the fight.

Depends on who scores landed shots. There are differing views on compu box. For me both were pi%s poor. Floyd more so, and more so because he should have been stamping his authority on the smaller Manny. He is TBE, after all?

Manny deserves credit for actually trying to make a fight of it, successful or not. Floyd does not deserve credit for fighting in such a negative way.

In a nutshell: Dreadfully weak offensive fight.

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

Manny deserves credit for actually trying to make a fight of it, successful or not. Floyd does not deserve credit for fighting in such a negative way.

Seriously this is crazy, Floyd was clearly ahead after the 1st couple of rounds and Manny didn't try to catch up, Floyd was able to coast because Manny's lack of effort and been happy to go 12 probably thinking he'd get a big money rematch

Manny ruined that fight as he changed his style, Mayweather done as he always does, Counter punches so if you throw 10 he'll react in kind, if you throw feck all like Manny he will throw just enough that he is winning rounds as he was.

Manny stunk that fight out.

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

Seriously this is crazy, Floyd was clearly ahead after the 1st couple of rounds and Manny didn't try to catch up, Floyd was able to coast because Manny's lack of effort and been happy to go 12 probably thinking he'd get a big money rematch

Manny ruined that fight as he changed his style, Mayweather done as he always does, Counter punches so if you throw 10 he'll react in kind, if you throw feck all like Manny he will throw just enough that he is winning rounds as he was.

Manny stunk that fight out.

We'll agree to disagree. I am not alone in my view, and you are not alone in yours. I just think that you are being overly harsh on Manny. Floyd stunk the fight every bit as much. TBE, fighting a smaller man, and he barely scratched him the whole night. Was on the back-foot for a lot of the fight. Floyd should have put on a show and exploited Manny. He didn't come close to doing that. Hence Manny's surprise at the result. Take even JMM. At least JMM fought Manny and gave it to him. Didn't retreat and clinch and duck and dive and swipe his way through the fight. Floyd did exactly that.

One key ingredient of scoring a fight is effective and clean punches landed. No way Floyd came close in this category. Nor did Manny.

megadodge

cowzerp wrote: »

Seriously this is crazy, Floyd was clearly ahead after the 1st couple of rounds and Manny didn't try to catch up, Floyd was able to coast because Manny's lack of effort and been happy to go 12 probably thinking he'd get a big money rematch

Manny ruined that fight as he changed his style, Mayweather done as he always does, Counter punches so if you throw 10 he'll react in kind, if you throw feck all like Manny he will throw just enough that he is winning rounds as he was.

Manny stunk that fight out.

Jesus Paul that's ridiculous. I thought Mayweather won the fight and it went exactly as I thought it would and I had money on that very result, so I'm not being wise after the event. It was widely expected by actual boxing fans to be a boring Mayweather points win and that's precisely how it turned out, so how did Manny "ruin" the great spectacle that nobody thought it was going to be.

walshb

megadodge wrote: »

Jesus Paul that's ridiculous. I thought Mayweather won the fight and it went exactly as I thought it would and I had money on that very result, so I'm not being wise after the event. It was widely expected by actual boxing fans to be a boring Mayweather points win and that's precisely how it turned out, so how did Manny "ruin" the great spectacle that nobody thought it was going to be.

If asked would you be more confident that Floyd beat Manny OR that JLC 'beat' Floyd? Had Manny gotten the decision would it have been more undeserved than Floyd getting the decision over JLC? Just getting a feel for how you viewed/scored the Manny-Floyd fight.

megadodge

walshb wrote: »

If asked would you be more confident that Floyd beat Manny OR that JLC 'beat' Floyd? Had Manny gotten the decision would it have been more undeserved than Floyd getting the decision over JLC? Just getting a feel for how you viewed/scored the Manny-Floyd fight.

I thought Floyd was a fair winner. It was definitely not a 'masterclass' etc. that some ass-kissing commentators were claiming and in that respect I see exactly where you're coming from. I honestly won't bother ever looking at the fight again in order to score it, as it's just not worth it, but on the night I couldn't make a case for Manny.

I've mentioned it often enough on here that I thought Castillo was a CLEAR winner. That fight wasn't even close.

OneOfThem

What'd people think about the introduction of more technology? Like the Hit Chip that they use in BKB now? (anyone watch BKB btw? Thoughts on it?)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROK947vw3yQ