Amateur's affecting Boxing detrimentally.

[donnydarkoIRL]

Hey Macho, I do respect the fact that a fighter who competes in the Amateur ranks will have a better punching technoique, but will the scoring system encourage the fighter to throw less/or even tons more less perfect punches?

[Macho]

Hey Macho, I do respect the fact that a fighter who competes in the Amateur ranks will have a better punching technoique, but will the scoring system encourage the fighter to throw less/or even tons more less perfect punches?

Well maybe not a lot of perfect punches , but yes a lot of punches for demolish you opponent , RIGH?

[Kev]

I must admit I'm not really familiar with the amatuer scene but hasn't it pretty much always been this way though?

I've always thought that the amatuer game rewards technical ability and accuracy but ignores other facets of professional boxing, i.e the real physical qualities needed to win, power, stamina, conditioning, heart etc.

It's probably a great test of a boxers skill but is not really relavent to real professional boxing, kind of like how a snooker player may be a world trick shot champion but not a decent pro tournament player because he lacks a complete all around game.

That make anys sense?

[DaxxKahn]

An arguement that has two sides (Like most but)....I have been on the side where I have argued about the way amateurs do not credit volume and style...only clean punches...I have also been all for it....

IMO it should be done in stages....

Novice should only count the clean effective punches...Only to avoid guys going in there and throwing everything but the kitchen sink and we avoid a tough man type performance where a guy just goes and throws until he is exausted in hopes of a big shot landing.....

I have been against it once a fighter is past novice because the experience changes a fighters style....Plus it is not really that effective in sparring just to concentrate on clean landing shots...you have to concentrate on footwork defense etc and as the fighter spars with more of a variety of other fighters his style will naturally change intop what is effective for him....that is not always going to be the way amateurs score fights....

I have had fighters of mine that have pretty much beat the tar out of the other guy but lost because the other guy stayed in a shell for 4 rounds and hardly threw anything.......

So in that aspect there needs to be an adjustment according to how many fights the guy has and what to look for......Ring generalship should be factored in the scoring IMO but what are you going to do...Coaches need to get together and approach the powers that be in Colorado.....

To have things changed on a world level would tak quite a bit more then that

[donnydarkoIRL]

I must admit I'm not really familiar with the amatuer scene but hasn't it pretty much always been this way though?

I've always thought that the amatuer game rewards technical ability and accuracy but ignores other facets of professional boxing, i.e the real physical qualities needed to win, power, stamina, conditioning, heart etc.

It's probably a great test of a boxers skill but is not really relavent to real professional boxing, kind of like how a snooker player may be a world trick shot champion but not a decent pro tournament player because he lacks a complete all around game.

That make anys sense?

Hey again Bilbs,
No, computer points scoring has been introduced in the last ten years.
Before that pen scoring was used in which rounds were judged on Effective aggression, Style, Defense and punches landed. This was more objective and if one had impartial judges a good way of scoring a fight.
This is still commonly used in local tournaments and some minor championships.

I agree, the amateurs are breeding two types of fighters;
1) The accurate counter puncher, throwing few punches but landing well.

2) The aggresive scrappy puncher, who throws volumes of less clean punches landing a small percentage of a large volume in hope that he will out score the opponent.