Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  5
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Re-assessing Round scoring

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    703
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    947
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re-assessing Round scoring

    I'm not disputing the decision of the Ward/Kov whatsoever.

    However, could argue that Ward won more rounds than Kovalev (7-5). Yet that same individual can argue that Kovalev's winning rounds were more dominant than Ward's winning rounds.

    Should this be taken into consideration in scoring?
    Last edited by Sleepwalker; 11-27-2016 at 04:04 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    205
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    883
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    10-10 rounds. If you have to think about it, then your default score should be 10-10. There's no reason to artificially insert precision into something inherently imprecise. If a boxer wants to win a round, he has to do it clearly. This alone would probably solve the Ward/Kov problem.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,348
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    730
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    I re scored it and had a 7 round swing

    http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...t-rescore.html
    You say tomato,
    ‘n I say …… it correctly.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    1,126
    Mentioned
    73 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    464
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    At this point, I think we might get better, more consistent decisions if we thumbtacked a picture of both guys to a wall and let a blindfolded man throw darts at them until he hit one.

    At the very least, it would cut down on suspected corruption!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    64,622
    Mentioned
    1667 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3019
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    Score the round as you see it the first time, do not bother re-scoring it again.
    Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Ex'way to your Skull
    Posts
    25,024
    Mentioned
    232 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    Quote Originally Posted by Sleepwalker View Post
    I'm not disputing the decision of the Ward/Kov whatsoever.

    However, could argue that Ward won more rounds than Kovalev (7-5). Yet that same individual can argue that Kovalev's winning rounds were more dominant than Ward's winning rounds.

    Should this be taken into consideration in scoring?
    No. A big round still 10-9 should not Carey more weight than a tight 10-9 round.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    26,053
    Mentioned
    530 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1947
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    Quote Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleepwalker View Post
    I'm not disputing the decision of the Ward/Kov whatsoever.

    However, could argue that Ward won more rounds than Kovalev (7-5). Yet that same individual can argue that Kovalev's winning rounds were more dominant than Ward's winning rounds.

    Should this be taken into consideration in scoring?
    No. A big round still 10-9 should not Carey more weight than a tight 10-9 round.


    That's the way it is now, of course. But we're looking for ways to improve scoring.

    Say, for instance, that X fights Y and X dominates the first 6 rounds pounding Y from pillar to post, but no knockdowns. You know most of those will be scored 10-9. Then Y gets on his bicycle and begins purposely trying to eke out rounds, pitty-patting his way to close rounds that he wins. So in the end it's six 10-9 rounds each. Given human error, two of the three inept or corrupt judges could give one of X's rounds to Y. Voila....... you have a decision for Y.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    64,622
    Mentioned
    1667 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3019
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    1/2 point rounds? instead 10-9
    Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    26,053
    Mentioned
    530 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1947
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    Yeah. Maybe THAT'S our problem. Boxing oversimplifies everything so that a dominant round where the opponent does everything but knock the other guy down........... gets the same reward as a guy who barely ekes out a round. How antiquated and crappy is that?? Heaven knows judges don't need any help screwing up decisions. It's a daily occurrence in our sport. Why give them a system designed to help them f*ck up. Train judges better, then give them the latitude to score rounds 10-8 or 10-7 as they see fit. What do we have to lose? It can always be changed back if it doesn't work.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Ex'way to your Skull
    Posts
    25,024
    Mentioned
    232 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleepwalker View Post
    I'm not disputing the decision of the Ward/Kov whatsoever.

    However, could argue that Ward won more rounds than Kovalev (7-5). Yet that same individual can argue that Kovalev's winning rounds were more dominant than Ward's winning rounds.

    Should this be taken into consideration in scoring?
    No. A big round still 10-9 should not Carey more weight than a tight 10-9 round.


    That's the way it is now, of course. But we're looking for ways to improve scoring.

    Say, for instance, that X fights Y and X dominates the first 6 rounds pounding Y from pillar to post, but no knockdowns. You know most of those will be scored 10-9. Then Y gets on his bicycle and begins purposely trying to eke out rounds, pitty-patting his way to close rounds that he wins. So in the end it's six 10-9 rounds each. Given human error, two of the three inept or corrupt judges could give one of X's rounds to Y. Voila....... you have a decision for Y.
    A bomber clubs his ballerina opponent 6 rounds and leads 60-54. Then the tide shifts and the ballerina/pansy skips and frolicks about for the next 6 rounds flicking a weak but scoring jab and AVOIDS ALL PUNCHES. I have no problem with the judges giving it to the ballerina.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    26,053
    Mentioned
    530 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1947
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    Quote Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleepwalker View Post
    I'm not disputing the decision of the Ward/Kov whatsoever.

    However, could argue that Ward won more rounds than Kovalev (7-5). Yet that same individual can argue that Kovalev's winning rounds were more dominant than Ward's winning rounds.

    Should this be taken into consideration in scoring?
    No. A big round still 10-9 should not Carey more weight than a tight 10-9 round.


    That's the way it is now, of course. But we're looking for ways to improve scoring.

    Say, for instance, that X fights Y and X dominates the first 6 rounds pounding Y from pillar to post, but no knockdowns. You know most of those will be scored 10-9. Then Y gets on his bicycle and begins purposely trying to eke out rounds, pitty-patting his way to close rounds that he wins. So in the end it's six 10-9 rounds each. Given human error, two of the three inept or corrupt judges could give one of X's rounds to Y. Voila....... you have a decision for Y.
    A bomber clubs his ballerina opponent 6 rounds and leads 60-54. Then the tide shifts and the ballerina/pansy skips and frolicks about for the next 6 rounds flicking a weak but scoring jab and AVOIDS ALL PUNCHES. I have no problem with the judges giving it to the ballerina.


    "Skips and frolics"


    Let's then give the tiara to the ballerina, but the belts to the bomber.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Ex'way to your Skull
    Posts
    25,024
    Mentioned
    232 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Re-assessing Round scoring

    Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleepwalker View Post
    I'm not disputing the decision of the Ward/Kov whatsoever.

    However, could argue that Ward won more rounds than Kovalev (7-5). Yet that same individual can argue that Kovalev's winning rounds were more dominant than Ward's winning rounds.

    Should this be taken into consideration in scoring?
    No. A big round still 10-9 should not Carey more weight than a tight 10-9 round.


    That's the way it is now, of course. But we're looking for ways to improve scoring.

    Say, for instance, that X fights Y and X dominates the first 6 rounds pounding Y from pillar to post, but no knockdowns. You know most of those will be scored 10-9. Then Y gets on his bicycle and begins purposely trying to eke out rounds, pitty-patting his way to close rounds that he wins. So in the end it's six 10-9 rounds each. Given human error, two of the three inept or corrupt judges could give one of X's rounds to Y. Voila....... you have a decision for Y.
    A bomber clubs his ballerina opponent 6 rounds and leads 60-54. Then the tide shifts and the ballerina/pansy skips and frolicks about for the next 6 rounds flicking a weak but scoring jab and AVOIDS ALL PUNCHES. I have no problem with the judges giving it to the ballerina.


    "Skips and frolics"


    Let's then give the tiara to the ballerina, but the belts to the bomber.
    OK I got a good idea. "entertainment value" should be added to the scorecards--- judges must add ONE POINT to the fighter who brought "more entertainment" to the crowd ...... It could Make or break a fight.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 317
    Last Post: 01-29-2008, 07:49 PM
  2. Replies: 261
    Last Post: 08-02-2006, 08:24 AM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-04-2006, 03:01 AM
  4. Replies: 111
    Last Post: 04-21-2006, 12:46 AM
  5. Replies: 142
    Last Post: 04-17-2006, 02:32 AM

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Saddo Boxing - Boxing