judges again...

[KBB]

You are a complete tool, defence is defence , countering is countering

So someone that decided to attack my posts without understanding the words that I’ve written… accuses me of being a tool?

Read my posts in this thread again and you'll surely realise that you’ve done yourself a disservice!

You still haven't answered my post. You guys are claiming Khan was more effective on offense just because Algieri had some swelling, marks on the face isn't always indicative of who has been more effective, I've seen many fights where the victor was more marked up than the loser but doesn't mean that the winner was less effective.

Again, I keep seeing the same theme over and over with you and a few others here in regards to how well you think Khan performed offensively but you continually fail to show the other areas that boxing is judged upon.

Algieri controlled the real estate the entire fight.
Algieri had the cleaner and harder punches (a face being marked up doesn't always indicate a winner)
Algieri aggression was more effective in the fact that it kept Khan honest enough to know that he could not stand toe to toe with Algieri and that his harder shots were making that same "effectiveness" effective.
Algieri did get hit with many shots but if you were to take 2 of his shots vs 4 of Khan's then it's obvious that Chris' shots were not only harder but more obvious/cleaner.
Khan was busier, I'll give him that but he threw a great many shots that did not land at all, Algieri threw some shots that didn't land but he wasn't always throwing combos and many of his tell-tell bodyshots weren't counted as they should've been.

Either way; Khan isn't in the league of Manny or Floyd and both would easily destroy him. I told you all that he hadn't really shown much in his so called "progression" as a fighter based on his one victory over Alexander, I see nothing in him as far as punching power, speed or defense that would give any of the real Elites any problems whatsoever.

[ikorolev]

Algieri didn't control anything. He was moving forward, but was landing very few punches. Khan is the one who was in control by landing more and better punches.

[KBB]

Algieri didn't control anything. He was moving forward, but was landing very few punches. Khan is the one who was in control by landing more and better punches.

I guess you don't understand that Algieri was dictating the fight and not Amir but because of your bias I understand why you say what you did.

All you are focusing on is the offense, so it's obvious that you discounted all the other criteria for judging a fight.

[ikorolev]

Algieri didn't control anything. He was moving forward, but was landing very few punches. Khan is the one who was in control by landing more and better punches.

I guess you don't understand that Algieri was dictating the fight and not Amir but because of your bias I understand why you say what you did.

All you are focusing on is the offense, so it's obvious that you discounted all the other criteria for judging a fight.

Then Gradovich was dictating the fight against Selby, Stevens was dictating against N'Dam and Maidana and Pacquiao were dictating against Mayweather

[Pureist]

You are a complete tool, defence is defence , countering is countering

So someone that decided to attack my posts without understanding the words that I’ve written… accuses me of being a tool?

Read my posts in this thread again and you'll surely realise that you’ve done yourself a disservice!

Fighter slips the punch ( defence ) and then counters with a hook ( counter punch ) not defence, offense ----- fighter slips punch ( defence ) fighter doesn't slip punch , hit, no defence

[Pureist]

Veteran boxing judge Steve Weisfeld offers tips on how to score a fight
MAR 06, 2015 BY LEM SATTERFIELD
A professional boxing judge since 1991, Steve Weisfeld has worked ringside for approximately 1,600 fights, including about 80 world championships. He also spent two years as the unofficial scorer for HBO's Boxing after Dark.

Adrien Broner
A boxing judge must consider many factors each round in scoring a fight, and ultimately in determining the winner.

Weisfeld, who is licensed as a boxing judge in New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, lent his expertise to Premier Boxing Champions on what judges look for when scoring a fight.

"A lot of times fans hear that judges focus on four categories: clean punches, effective aggressiveness, defense and ring generalship," Weisfeld said. "But based upon my own experience, my conversations with other judges and seminars conducted by top judges, judges really focus on one category, and that's clean punches."

Here, Weisfeld explains how judges weigh each of the four categories in scoring a fight, as well as offer a tutorial on the 10-point must system used to judge each round and, ultimately, determine the winner of a fight.

Clean punches: To me, clean punches are the most important aspect, and the other factors are really tied to that. Take the phrase, "effective aggressiveness." How is a boxer effective? He's effective by landing clean punches. How about "defense?" A boxer shows great defense by not getting hit with clean punches. And, finally, the term "ring generalship." A boxer uses the ring to put himself in a position to land clean punches.

So let's focus on the phrase "clean punches." It may not be initially apparent, but there are various elements included within that phrase. First, there's the number of punches. The boxer who lands more punches generally wins. However, harder punches count more than lighter punches.

Now, there's no mathematical formula that equates the number of punches with the hardness of the punch. The judge has to weigh the two based on his experience. But more important than the number of punches or the hardness of the punch is the effect of the punch. For example, a seemingly lighter punch that causes a boxer to stagger is scored higher than a seemingly harder punch that has no effect.

Defense: Defense is important because it helps a boxer set up his offense. Most judges that I have spoken to do not give credit for defense alone. If a boxer has a good defense, it means that he is not being hit with punches. But let's remember the purpose of the sport: to land punches on your opponent.

If Boxer A throws 10 punches in a round, but lands none of them, and Boxer B lands zero and throws zero, you still have an even round with no punches landing. You don't want to create a disincentive for a boxer to land punches if he thinks he's going to be penalized for missing.

Effective aggression: In the extremely rare case of a judge scoring a round otherwise even, the judge might side with the boxer who was the aggressor on the theory that he is trying to make the fight. However, the key is whether or not the aggression is "effective.” Is the boxer landing or just coming forward?

Ring generalship: This term describes a boxer who is generally controlling the action and putting himself into position to land clean punches, or employing a strategy to make his opponent fight his fight. Sometimes, however, the other boxer is forced to fight his opponent's fight and comes out on top.

The 10-point must system of scoring: Fans may accept as a given the fact that the 10-point must system is universal, but that wasn’t the case until recently. Putting aside the possibility of a point deduction by the referee for repeated low blows or other infractions, the winner of a round must receive 10 points, and the loser nine or less. A typical round is 10-9.

If a boxer scores a knockdown, that's usually a 10-8 round. If a boxer thoroughly dominates a round, even without a knockdown, it also could be scored 10-8. If a boxer scores two knockdowns in a round, it’s generally scored 10-7, and so on

Maybe you should eloquently explain that to to this judge who mentioned every thing under the sun EXCEPT effective defence , he mustn't have thought it that important

[KBB]

Then Gradovich was dictating the fight against Selby, Stevens was dictating against N'Dam and Maidana and Pacquiao were dictating against Mayweather

Stupid comparisons, Manny was not effective in his aggression, Algieri was, I have yet to see the other bouts so I won't comment on them. Floyd was countering not running like Khan was in his fight vs Maidana.

There's a difference but it's obvious that you do not want to see it.

[ikorolev]

Algieri was NOT effective in his aggression and Khan was NOT running more than Floyd.

[KBB]

Algieri was NOT effective in his aggression and Khan was NOT running more than Floyd.

Khan was running, in fact one could easily say that's what he did more than anything else. You can try to bait with the silly Floyd comments but Amir lost that fight.

Khan is the Usain Bolt of Boxing, dude can run faster than anyone in boxing and that's from a feather-fisted boxer with only 6 KO's. I can see a fighter running from Manny but running from Algieri, you know he's scared.

[ikorolev]

I don't like Khan and was rooting for Algieri, but Chris disappointed. There is no way he won that fight. Khan was fighting in Algieri's home town where Chris got a gift against Provo, and all 3 judges gave the win to Khan. Take off your prejudice glasses and face reality.