The criteria comes down to effective aggression e.g consistently landing punches not just throwing desperate haymakers which is mostly what Paul threw in this fight

ring control e.g which fighter is controlling what is happening and enforcing their style

Defence is also a factor e.g blocking, slipping, parrying strikes

Then there is significant strikes throwing lots of punches which aren’t hitting the target isn’t scored the same as landing flush hard shots

Also Paul didn’t land more shots than Fury he landed a higher percentage of the shots he threw but he attempted about half the amount of strikes that Fury did Paul landed 49 strikes from 157 thrown whereas Fury landed 88 from 302 strikes

Fury landed the more significant shots, was controlling the fight from start to finish and was doing a better job of deflecting shots so very few of what Paul threw landed clean

I don’t know how it’s scored

Like any sport with judges, it will always be somewhat subjective. Of course, there are guidelines, which the comment above goers over quite nicely.

In boxing, each round is scored by three judges. They can give up to 10 points to each boxer, but the overwhelming majority of the time, the score is either 10-9 or 10-8.

At the end of the match, each judge totals up their scores to decide who they think the winner is, and whoever is declared winner by at least two of the judges wins the match.

Boxing is scored by the 10 must system. In a typical round, a judge gives whoever they think won the round 10 points and the loser gets nine. If somebody gets knocked down, then it is generally 10-8 against them. Every once in a while you will have 10-7 rounds, but you have to be truly awful to get that score.

IIRC everyone you get knocked down, you subtract 1

Pretty much. But judges generally will stop at 10-7 because otherwise the fight becomes absolutely unwinnable for the other side.

[deleted]