Here follows an interesting link with many of modern boxing rules with some detailed articles that sure worth take a look and deep below of how judging works.
Sequitorian wrote:Ring Generalship, Effective Aggressiveness, Clean Punching and Defense ...
Those who score boxing based on the idea that it's about winning a fight generally stress Clean Punching ...
... which is by far the most prevalent perspective ...
But those who score boxing based on the idea that it's about measuring the better man employ all four criteria equally ...
... because that's what boxing is really all about ... measuring the better man ...
Yeah, employ all four criteria equally is the correct to do and as ppl don't know this thing, think that only who hits more wins, even if don't connect.
Weisfeld's comments are EXACTLY what is wrong with judging these days. He explains what judges SHOULD be scoring on but then says that he and every Judge he knows, only look at CLEAN PUNCHES. Right there, he doesn't get another job judging if i'm running boxing. This is probably why we scratch our heads after hearing the scores.
For instance, we saw a boxer get knocked down this weekend with a blocked punch. We continuously see boxers initiating the action...outlanding and outthrowing the more skilled boxer only to find that they lost those rounds because the more skilled boxer landed a couple clean punches at the 10 second clapper at the end of the rounds.
Reading this just aggravated the hell out of me. So most judges throw out 75% of the criteria they are supposed to be judging on? Get them the F out of the arena.
