Quote Originally Posted by Fenster
Ever since I can rememeber it's been said - American judges score in favour of aggression.
I guess that's true but I mean it's changed slightly in that,now even if they miss the punches they are throwing,as long as they are throwing lots of them and are coming forwards,they get too much credit.

If you get time,watch Penelosa and Ponce and you'll see my point.How should they score that type of fight? The judges and Lederman had it for Ponce as did I but when I read lots of boxing commentators reports and scorecards,they had Penelosa.

Quote Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan
I do remember Merchant and Lamley talking about how the judges are being encouraged to put more enfasis on the agressor and the one pressing the fight. This was shortly after the DLH - Maywether fight. If I am not mistaken is was at the Cotto - Judah fight where they talked about this. The reason they mentioned was to force fighters to put more effort on pressing the fight and making fights more exiting.

In general I believe they are doing a good job.

You could argue that Maywether should have won by wider margin but the fact is that he was just not busy enough in some of those rounds.

You could argue that Spinks was clearly out boxing Taylor but the fact is acording to compubox he only landed 17% of his punches and Taylor's punches were having much more effect.

I did not see the Moralez - Diaz fight but other than a handfull of people, I have not heard of many complain of the decision. As you said, not even Moralez complained.

I can't remember any fight I would consider an all out robbery this year. (I don't claim to have watched every fight either)

The point is, as long as they don't get carried away and tottally ignore a fighter with supperior skills who is schooling the aggressor and don't give him the rounds, I will not complain and I like the approach they are taking.
Yeah,I think they were slating Spinks for not making the fight too but that's ridiculous. He was fighting against the recognised champ of the division,a guy who could easily move up and do well and Spinks looked tiny. Spinks has hardly any pop so obviously it would be foolish to forsake what got him there just so that he can be the agressor. Obviously there are situations where guys just don't fight and back up but I don't this fight is an example of that.

I respect your opinion with regards to you liking the way fights are scored but I totally and utterly disagree with your call on the Spinks fight. Watch the fight without Compubox numbers(which I believe were greatly exaggerated in favour of Taylor) and you'll see Spinks lands more punches. Also,the only real hard punch I recall is when Taylor was briefly shaken walking into a Cory punch. I don't remember seeing Spinks hurt at all.

I guess it goes back ot my original point,are you going to give the round to the guy coming forward,hardly throwing but being agressive or to the guy backpedalling but landing. I'm probably making a big deal about nothing but I think it's an interesting discussion.

Also,I know Morales made no argument but that's because I'm guessing before the final bell,he had decided to retire anyway. It still does not excuse the fact that Diaz was coming forward,pushing Morales into the ropes,getting countered and he won. Having seen the judges scorecards,makes this decision seem even more ridiculous. They gave rounds to Diaz just because he was coming forward but he was clearly getting countered.