Quote Originally Posted by Beanflicker View Post
James Toney vs Sam Peter 1 is one I can think of offhand, I thought Toney outclassed him and got jobbed.

Oscar/Floyd is another... the majority seems to think it was a close fight, or that Oscar could have won if he threw more jabs or something. I think Floyd absolutely took him to school.

One of the main things I find with scoring is that the majority of people

a) score aggressiveness, not EFFECTIVE aggressiveness. How many times have you heard "Fighter A made the fight by coming forward", which is absolute nonsense.

b) have a notion that you have to really dominate the champ to become champ, which is equally stupid.

c) score based on punch totals, and not clean, effective punching (this isn't the amateurs).

^in those ways I differ in my scoring.
i dont think its absolute nonsense, after all its entertainment, i watch boxing for exciting fights

i think the scoring of fights should be modelled around a more entertaining fighter

theres a fight, both landing a similar amount of punches, one is on the run one is chasing him down, the guy who is pushing the fight should get the benefits

obviously this is subjective coz the guy chasing could be doing a windmill or something which is a bit too daft to win the round

froch dirrel both landed a similar amount of punches froch should have won all 12 rounds because dirrell was negative to the extreme