These are the criteria that should be used when scoring a fight, and seeing as how fights are scored today under a ten point must system, people should try not to, and shouldn't if they can help it score a round even. An overabundance of even scored rounds is the reason there is a ten point must in place today.... If i ever find myself really having trouble scoring a particular round, I ask myself who I'd rather have been at the end of the round, and go from there.
That said, It's not even solely all about punches thrown/landed, or aggression, or lack thereof. You've got to take into account a fighter's ability to control and dictate the pace of a fight, whether it be by slowing or pushing the tempo in order to make it "his" fight. A fighters ability to work the ring plays a part in my scoring of a fight also. Ex: Effective lateral movement that may keep an opponent from setting his feet, leaving him off balance and unable to sit on his punches. Defense plays it's part in the scoring of a fight, especially if a fighter can use it to set up his offense in an effective and economical way.
As for your giving the "champion" the benefit of the doubt and giving him a close round... I know a lot of people feel that way, but I don't agree with it. I don't think the "champion" should get a handicap just because he's got a belt. I say if the fight is close enough for the belt holder to be handed a win in a close fight just because he's the belt holder, then you could also say the champ shouldn't have let the fight be so close in the first place. All rounds should be scored free of bias, regardless of who's in either corner. I counter the saying "take the belt from the champ", with "The champ should protect his belt without the aid of gift rounds".
Scoring, of course, is subjective. I tend to put a little more emphasis on ring generalship and defense than a lot of people, but regardless of how one goes about scoring a round, those two things should not be neglected.
Aggression can count when the other fighter is avoiding and running away. I agree, not many know how to score, and many get influenced by the cheering of the crowd.
Like you said, people place too much importance on the latter rounds, forgetting the early ones. Their biases are also a factor. Any little thing that their favorite fighter does will make them think that they're doing very well, even when the boxer is only hitting the defense, arms etc.
A lot of is pure bias.
There is no right or wrong way to score a fight, if there was only one criteria to be considered then we would only need 1 judge. Scoring is subjective and I prefer for the whole picture to be looked at when deciding who to give a round to but I think the single most important factor is clean punches landed but of course sometimes in a round they are barely existent, so then I look at who's running and who's swinging
I get what you are saying...but on the other hand....if you overemphasise punches landed and not award aggression, then you will turn pro fights into how the amateurs have been going on for years
where a guy lands 2 punches then runs the rest of the round to keep his score up....thats not good for anyone...least of all the fans who want to watch a good ole brawl
No no no no....it's becuz they don't know both the fighters in the ring very well. If you know both fighters very very well, you'll know whats going on. You gotta know each fighters style skills and capabitlities and more.
aggression does count...although not officially...if they see you trying to make an effort chasing your opponent, punching arms etc..it makes the judges give you the rd esp if it very close or difficult to score...esp in us
Its because So many people lack knowledge of the game, just because they watch it means nothing.
Bcuz I dunno
Too many fight fans mistakenly award a round to a fighter who is aggressive. Aggression does not win rounds. Landed punches win rounds. Too many fans score a round for a fighter because he landed punches on his opponent's arms. Arm punches do not count in the scoring! Too many fans place more importance on the latter rounds of a fight than the early rounds! Each round must be scored INDIVIDUALLY and EQUALLY. In a championship fight, if a particular round is very close, it is either scored for the reigning champion or called EVEN.....
Watch the 2nd Ali-Norton fight on YouTube and you'll see amazing things by Ali in the first 6 rounds. He had Norton beaten and bruised and nearly KOd him in the 6th round. Norton came back and won 3, maybe 4 of the latter rounds.
Watch the 3rd fight and you'll see an aggressive Norton barely losing by decision in a CHAMPIONSHIP fight.....Ali EARNED his title by whupping Frazier and Foreman. Norton was KOd in 2 by Foreman and never fought Frazier....Whatever...these fights were a LONG time ago.....Either way, Norton, whom I admire, admitted that the best heavyweight ever was the Ali of the 60s....Give Norton credit though for breaking Ali's jaw in their first fight and for beating Jimmy Young, Jerry Quarry, my personal friend Jack O'Halloran and for almost beating Holmes.....Norton gave Holmes trouble with his jab....
