points for winning

boxinghusa · Post by **boxinghusa** » 18 Aug 2007, 12:16

i am a fan off mettin huizer from holland''but i can not understand why he don t get points for his last two fights.
and what can i do that he get his points,jou can also look for huizer on youtube boxing 82 mettin huizer

JCS · Post by **JCS** » 18 Aug 2007, 12:58

boxinghusa wrote:i am a fan off mettin huizer from holland''but i can not understand why he don t get points for his last two fights.
and what can i do that he get his points,jou can also look for huizer on youtube boxing 82 mettin huizer

Huh?

http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hu ... &cat=boxer

He's fought two guys with 0 wins. Why should he receive points?

boxinghusa · Post by **boxinghusa** » 19 Aug 2007, 17:50

but other fighters that fight the same fighters did get points so why huizer didn t get points

JCS · Post by **JCS** » 19 Aug 2007, 19:07

boxinghusa wrote:but other fighters that fight the same fighters did get points so why huizer didn t get points

Because once you reach a certain point, you no longer receive points for beating nobodies.

Blue · Post by **Blue** » 19 Aug 2007, 22:36

JCS wrote:
boxinghusa wrote:but other fighters that fight the same fighters did get points so why huizer didn t get points
Because once you reach a certain point, you no longer receive points for beating nobodies.

What is the actual criteria for that certain point?
Doesn’t it discriminate against the more accomplished fighters?

JCS · Post by **JCS** » 19 Aug 2007, 22:49

Blue wrote:
JCS wrote:
boxinghusa wrote:but other fighters that fight the same fighters did get points so why huizer didn t get points
Because once you reach a certain point, you no longer receive points for beating nobodies.
What is the actual criteria for that certain point?
Doesn’t it discriminate against the more accomplished fighters?

If the loser has less than 25% of the points that the winner does, the winner cannot benefit under any circumstances.

boxinghusa · Post by **boxinghusa** » 20 Aug 2007, 16:39

but jou need those boxers to ,and on paper they don t look strong but in the ring jou had to do the job .some time s they are stronger than the record they have

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 21 Aug 2007, 05:03

boxinghusa wrote:but jou need those boxers to ,and on paper they don t look strong but in the ring jou had to do the job .some time s they are stronger than the record they have

Ofcourse some fighters are better than their records suggest (and some fights are closer than the scoring suggests), but I think it's safe to say that on average good fighters have winning records while not-so-good fighters don't. Ranking fighters by their records is the most objective way of rating them.

points for winning

points for winning

Re: points for winning