Boxing: Scoring the Rounds
By Steve Trellert
07.07 - With the Floyd Mayweather-Jose Luis Castillo and Marco Antonio Barrera-Erik Morales II decisions still fresh in our minds as gifts bestowed by Boxing Judges, I feel a sudden urge to create my own criteria in terms of how scoring should work.
In order of priority:
If one fighter knocks another down legitimately the round should be scored 10-8 in favor of the boxer delivering the knockdown. If the boxer who was knocked down dominated the rest of that round he can reduce the score to 10-9 in favor of his opponent. For each additional knockdown one point should be additionally deducted. If there were no knockdowns or an even amount of them proceed to #2. Note: On some occasions a fighter is 'out on his feet.' If the referee intervenes and initiates an eight-count a 10-8 score should be given. If not the round should be scored 10-9 as the fighter who remained standing should be given credit for not hitting the floor. Therefore Ward should not have been given a 10-8 round against Gatti.
If one fighter clearly staggers his opponent more times in a round than the other, that fighter should win a 10-9 round. A 'staggering' is a noticeable momentary loss of physical equilibrium caused by damage due to a power punch or series of punches. This is the equivalent to noticing a fighter has been visibly hurt by an opponent's punch. If the number of staggers is even or none occurred, move on to #3.
#3.Clean Effective Punching
If one fighter clearly lands more accurate/clean punches to his opponent's head and body (non-blocked) than the other, he should win a 10-9 round. If they are even or the difference marginal, proceed to #4.
If the clean/effective punching was approximately even, give a 10-9 round to the fighter who was more aggressive. That is, moving towards the other fighter more and dictating the fight (taking the initiative). If this is approximately even, move on to #5.
If none of the above four criteria is satisfactory in creating delineation. Score the round 10-10.
Now I have never seen a judging criteria chart before, but intuitively I would presume the above matches it relatively closely (or at least should). My guess is that #4 is probably original. I think this should apply to close rounds such as many in the Mayweather-Castillo fight. The fighter taking it to the other and initiating the action should receive some preferential judging.
Now for the wrong Criteria which many suspect exists:
If the promoter who chose me paid for the airline ticket, hotel room and meals promotes only one of the fighters. The one being promoted should win all close rounds. If not applicable (N/A) move to #2.
If the Hometown fans cheer ten times louder for the home boxers jab than the visiting opponents power punch, I must have underestimated the power in that jab. Note: Get new glasses after the fight and get back to hotel safe. If not applicable move to #3.
The incumbent holding the belt must be a better boxer so he should win the close rounds. If N/A go to #4.
#4.Network Television Contract.
The multi-million dollar Network Television Contract holder must be the better boxer so he should win all of the close rounds. If not, go to #5.
#5.Flip the pencil.
Take your pick: eraser or point? Lost your pencil? Flip a coin. Should have plenty of those.
If you think the above criteria are accurate or a load a bullocks, tell me via the Eastside message boards or email me at [email protected]