2008 Olympic Games Beijing 8.8.08-8.24.08 (with spoilers)

[Broncano]

Speaking of which, in Khedafi Djelkhir of France you see a guy who should stick with the amateurs.

Mexican Santos, on the other hand, would not be too bad should he turn pro.

In their QF match points were adding on the Frenchman's score as randomly (and quickly) as a Vegas slot machine.

[boxmel]

Mel, what I am saying is if fighter a scored 3 points on pucnhes and fighter be only 1 point but the 2 points as a bonus due to a warning then common sense tells us that fighter A should have more when accepted score is consider since the judges rules he won inside the ring

By George - I got it! Finally. Now I understand. Except the 2 points given is registered in the accepted score so it does factor in. You can also have an argument for the boxer not getting the warning being the better, cleaner boxer.

HOWEVER form the tiebreakers I have seen the exact opposite is true the fighter who the judges would have scored the loser is winning these fights. Very odd and against the statistical norm. Something is off here without a doubt.

Okay - I'm confused again. Does the fact that the high and the low scores for both are tossed out throw you off? Without seeing the individual scores, it's hard to see what the judges are doing/have done.

[emile]

Speaking of which, in Khedafi Djelkhir of France you see a guy who should stick with the amateurs.

Mexican Santos, on the other hand, would not be too bad should he turn pro.

In their QF match points were adding on the Frenchman's score as randomly (and quickly) as a Vegas slot machine.

My impression of Djelkhir is that he would make a very solid pro, because he is rough and strong. However, he doesn't have top hand speed. I didn't see the Santos fight, but I would guess that the veteran fighters are adjusting their tactics to fit the lower scoring.

So did anyone see the report on study regarding Tae Kwon Do scoring, which found that referees in a controlled experiment awarded more points to fighters in read gear than blue? Tae Kown Do scoring is similar to boxing. The researchers said this effect exists in boxing and wrestling as well, but is strongest in Tae Kwon Do. Even when you have judges who are fully acting impartially, there are going to be subconscious elements at work that are going to be difficult to predict.

[charlieb]

The amateur system should be geared entirely towards preparing fighters for a pro career

I don't understand why you think this is true.

Why aren't seasoned professionals, world champions even, allowed to participate? AIBA reasoning doesn't jive.

Is it or isn't it the norm for a fighter of any significant ability (outside of a red country) to turn professional? Name me a great fighter who didn't turn over and I'll name you 10 who did.

Dont get me wrong, winning an olympic final is a hefty achievement, but it's clearly seen as a springboard to the pro ranks by the majority, as it should be. Newly crowned gold medalists have a fat price tag on their heads, and rightly so because we live in a capitalist society and exceptional athletes should be rewarded exceptionally well.

This is the sport of boxing, it shouldn't be separated under the same name.

[charlieb]

The amateur system should be geared entirely towards preparing fighters for a pro career .

Why?

Why undergo an apprenticeship if you dont intend to practice to the full extent of your occupation?

[Canada]

But why are the professionals the full extent? Look at the majority of world champions in the pro ranks right now, most of them could never win world titles as amatuers or an Olympic Gold, and the majority have 10+ losses as amatuer but undefated or near perfect pro records.. This seems to point towards the amatuers being tougher and requiring a higher skill level, after all there are more amatuer fighters then professional. Also Warren was the first Olympian in over 30 years to compete at two olympics for the United States, there are many countries who have multiple boxers competing in their second olympics, so obviously the pros are of higher value in the US, but all of the world. And like Emile said 4 round bouts are used proffesional development.

[emile]

There isn't anything wrong with amateur boxing being a less physically and personally punishing version of the pro game. This is not that different than college sports, for example, where there are countless numbers of star players who never succeed as pros. Amateur boxing has perfectly nice niche as a sport with a combination of young fighters still learning the game and older fighters who prefer to fight as amateurs for a variety of reasons (including 'capitalist' reasons - Thai boxers, for example, make much more money as gold medal winners than they could as pros).

And why would amateur boxing want to serve as an apprenticeship for the pros, when the pros having nothing to offer. Are pro promoters and sanctioning bodies funding amateur boxing? Setting up academies to develop young boxers in developing countries? Not that I know of, so why should amateur boxing bow to them? There is a pro boxing development program already - it's called the 4-round undercard bout.

[boxmel]

So did anyone see the report on study regarding Tae Kwon Do scoring, which found that referees in a controlled experiment awarded more points to fighters in read gear than blue? Tae Kown Do scoring is similar to boxing. The researchers said this effect exists in boxing

Oh, poppycock! Tae Kwon Do scoring is NOTHING like boxing, except they use some kind of really weird computer scoring (you think ours is bad!). I watched a tournament at the OTC one year and watched the monitors and it didn't make a bit of sense to me. Anyway - now that I've digressed - I don't know of any testing that has proven that referees award more points to boxers in red. First of all, referees don't judge in the ring - they referee. That said, I know of no testing given to judges in that respect. Is there some psychological imprinting on red? I only focus on the red and blue to identify the boxers. In 21 years I can't ever remember being partial to red, nor has my scoring proven that point. Sheesh!

Why aren't seasoned professionals, world champions even, allowed to participate? AIBA reasoning doesn't jive.

Mainly because the IOC said NO? I think that's an excellent reason.

This is the sport of boxing, it shouldn't be separated under the same name.

Two sports, no comparison. That's what separates amateur from pro boxing. Just the way it is and always will be in order to stay an Olympic sport.

when the pros having nothing to offer. Are pro promoters and sanctioning bodies funding amateur boxing? Setting up academies to develop young boxers in developing countries? Not that I know of, so why should amateur boxing bow to them?

Thank you, Emile. The pros have never donated a penny to their farm team. They have always taken. Oscar had been asked for years for his support. Now that he's a major promoter, we're getting his sponsorship - wonder what that entails......

[emile]

The article refers to Tae Kwon Do referees, but I'm sure it is analogous to judges in boxing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/sport ... ref=slogin

The point of the article Mel, is that all of us make subconscious decisions we are not always aware we are making. I'm sure none of these judges or refs would think that they favor a color, but this was a controlled experiment. There may be problems with the methodology - I obviously haven't read the study.

[boxmel]

The point of the article Mel, is that all of us make subconscious decisions we are not always aware we are making. I'm sure none of these judges or refs would think that they favor a color, but this was a controlled experiment. There may be problems with the methodology - I obviously haven't read the study.

I'll believe it when our boxing judges are tested and the results come out we are all undeniably imprinting on red. I worked a local show yesterday where 7 out of the 10 bouts were won by the blue corner. Maybe we weren't looking at the right boxers?????

[Jeffsboxing]

What's the chance of Deontay Wilder against Clemente Russo? Russo is a world and european champion. It's like a camel to go through the eye of a needle?

[locoxelbox]

The scoring is a bit better now but I don´t agree at all with the result in the Jung Joo Kim-Demetrius Andrade bout. The american had to do a lot more to get his punches registered. He should have solved it anyway of course but if there was a winner it was him.

Also, weren´t the judges supposed to be drawn randomly instead of chosen to referee a fight? In the Vasyl Lomachenko-Li Yang fight the referee was the same that (rightfully) gave Yang two warnings at their 2007 Worlds semi-final. In that bout Yang was up 10-3 at one point and Lomachenko could finally win on a countback 13-13. Of course it could be a coincidence but I don´t believe in them.

The chinese have been getting some close/controversial bouts for a couple of days now but this fight was special as Lomachenko is a popular boxer/candidate for the Val Barker Trophy. In the first round (an improved) Lomachenko did very well but also the chinese landed some blows, however the round ended 5-0 to UKR. Makes me wonder if Wu & Co didn´t "recommend" the judges to help the ukraine boxer. Better to have one chinese lose than a major Olympic scandal.

[boxmel]

The scoring is a bit better now but I don´t agree at all with the result in the Jung Joo Kim-Demetrius Andrade bout. The american had to do a lot more to get his punches registered. He should have solved it anyway of course but if there was a winner it was him.

Disagree. He needed to throw more punches and he didn't. As you say, he should have solved it any way.

Also, weren´t the judges supposed to be drawn randomly instead of chosen to referee a fight?

I don't know specifically how they are chosen but will find out. The computer system has a draw program for the officials that selects them randomly (officials don't work their own continent, unless that has changed).

In the Vasyl Lomachenko-Li Yang fight the referee was the same that (rightfully) gave Yang two warnings at their 2007 Worlds semi-final. In that bout Yang was up 10-3 at one point and Lomachenko could finally win on a countback 13-13. Of course it could be a coincidence but I don´t believe in them.

And your point is? If the referee rightfully gave Yang two warnings in the Worlds, why would it be a conspiracy, or not a coincidence, to have him referee that bout in the Olympics? I don't think Terry Smith and the Technical Committee members sit down and analyze who refereed who last year - but I could be wrong.

The chinese have been getting some close/controversial bouts for a couple of days now but this fight was special as Lomachenko is a popular boxer/candidate for the Val Barker Trophy.

Hmmm - I thought the Val Barker was all about recognizing skills and ability, not popularity. Could be wrong there, too.

In the first round (an improved) Lomachenko did very well but also the chinese landed some blows, however the round ended 5-0 to UKR. Makes me wonder if Wu & Co didn´t "recommend" the judges to help the ukraine boxer. Better to have one chinese lose than a major Olympic scandal.

Ahhhh - the plot twists in Olympic scoring. Conspiracy reigns. I think the Chinese have lost a couple already, as have the Cubans and why would another loss cause a "major Olympic scandal?" And I really don't think "Wu & Company," whoever company is, are recommending any one so a winner can be assured. Wu's entire platform is on the openness and clarity and honesty of amateur scoring. I really don't think he'd jeopardize this and chance having boxing ousted from the Olympics. If this were the case, all the judges and the jury would have to be in on the plot - that's kinda hard to do since the judges and referees don't know what bouts they are working ahead of time. I think they find out one bout ahead.

[emile]

I'd have to agree with Mel, as I'm not a conspiracy theorist. It seems much more likely that Li Yang just struggled with the scoring like anybody else, which to me makes the idea that something shady is going on less plausible, not more plausible.

And, SPOILERS BELOW****************************************************************************









China just lost another fighter - one of the two most controversial winners Hu Qing, went down to unheralded Frenchman Daouda Sow.

And another edit - Wow, Kurbanov just lost by DQ to Shynaliyev AGAIN. The same thing happened in Chicago - those two must really hate each other right now.

[locoxelbox]

Regarding the Lomachenko-Yang bout I think it´s a possibility AIBA wanted to assure themselves of not having a controversy thus let a referee who won´t hesitate to give a warning if he has to, conduct the bout. The thing is that referee was voted the No 1 ref in the Worlds due to that bout presumably because Wu wanted transparency specially since Jacques Rogge was in attendance that night in Chicago.
Of course he could´ve gotten randomly picked now but...

[CoreyWash]

when does deontay fight again?

[boxmel]

The thing is that referee was voted the No 1 ref in the Worlds due to that bout

Was that the selection criteria? I find that hard to believe.

presumably because Wu wanted transparency specially since Jacques Rogge was in attendance that night in Chicago.

And that has what to do with anything? According to the last "pat Wu on the back" statement on the AIBA web site, Rogge is extremely pleased with boxing in this Olympics and Wu has stated it's the best ever.

Of course he could´ve gotten randomly picked now but...

And you think he did because??????? Hmmm - maybe it gives him a shot as best official at the Olympics???? Wait! Maybe he was selected because he's a good ref? We'll never know.

[Canada]

when does deontay fight again?

August 22. Heres a list to all the matches/results

http://results.beijing2008.cn/WRM/ENG/Schedule/BX.shtml

[sockdolager]

This might have been posted here already but apparently a boxer was disqualified for biting his opponents shoulder.

here is the link...
http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/beijin ... &type=lgns

[boxmel]

Looked at the semis this morning and it looks pretty much the same as it always does, with the exception that China has come to the top of the ladder, Russia has slipped, Ireland and Great Britain have both done good, USA sucked and India is getting their first ever medal in boxing:

Cuba - 8 (so much for the predicted "weak" team this year)
China - 4
Ireland - 3 (good!)
Russia - 3
Italy - 3
France - 3
Great Brit - 3
Mongolia - 2
Thailand - 2
Kazak - 2
MRI - 1
Moldavia - 1
Turkey - 1
Ukraine - 1
Azer - 1
Armenia - 1
Dom - 1
Kaz - 1
Korea - 1
US - 1
Ukraine - 1
India - 1

[CoreyWash]

lol yea Mel i remember some people saying how the cuban team was supposed to be weak..guess that was all a joke..what does the US need to do in order to be successful in international events? it just sucks for us to only be getting 1 medal and we sent 9 boxers..we need to get ourselves together..

[boxmel]

what does the US need to do in order to be successful in international events?

More involvement by personal coaches; arrange for as much international experience as possible for the top 4 or 5 in every weight class; pick the Olympic team in the Olympic year - the year ahead and residency program did more damage than good, in my opinion. Much more training in how to compete with computer scoring - must stay out of corners and off ropes and move in the middle of the ring to start with.

[zorndeslammes]

Hey now Mel, don't got forgetting Mauritius and their medal! I still can't believe I'm saying that.

I have some thoughts up that I'm trying to update everyday over at total-mma.com as part of the ongoing Olympic coverage. I really wish Teddy would shut up about the scoring and talk about the fights. That would be quite nice. The one thing that does bother me is how far down the scoring has gone from the World Championships. Low scoring makes fights closer and gives a chance to a guy who would otherwise be down 6 but is only down 2 a shot at a potentially undeserved comeback with some well placed punches or with a warning, and I think that's more bothersome than the "system" or whatever evils various people have ascribed it.

[boxmel]

Hey now Mel, don't got forgetting Mauritius and their medal! I still can't believe I'm saying that.

And what about India's first, too!

I really wish Teddy would shut up about the scoring and talk about the fights.

I really wish he would shut up, period. The next time he says "boxing in his real estate," I'm going to throw the remote at the TV. Thank God for mute buttons!

The one thing that does bother me is how far down the scoring has gone from the World Championships. Low scoring makes fights closer and gives a chance to a guy who would otherwise be down 6 but is only down 2 a shot at a potentially undeserved comeback with some well placed punches or with a warning, and I think that's more bothersome than the "system" or whatever evils various people have ascribed it.

Thank you for your support! I totally agree with your above statement. It makes no sense to me that they just aren't, obviously, pushing ANY buttons. Wu and the IOC appear to be happy, so I guess all is well, if not understood. I would, however, like to hear some kind of explanation.

[emile]

It's not India's first ever medal ever ever, which it is for Mauritius. I'm glad, because I thought Bruno Julie looked very good in Chicago and got a tough points loss against Joe Murray.

Overscoring and underscoring each bring a set of problems. As I said earlier, I think the bigger issue is that the fighter's did not appear prepared for the reduced scoring - and the early rounds went to those who adjusted more quickly. They should not have changed the scoring from the World Champs IMO, unless there was a major problem there, which there wasn't.

I generally like Teddy, and his catchphrases, just not in the Olympics.

SPOILERS BELOW************************************************************************




















Any predictions for the final medals? Here are mine.

48kg - Zou Shiming (gold), Yampier Hernandez (silver)
Zou has been shaky, but I think he'll probably pull it together. Not too confident that he can win these two fights though.
51kg - Somjit Jongjohor (gold), Georgy Balakshin (silver)
With his amazing defense, I don't think Somjit can be beated with the low scoring
54kg - Yankiel Leon (gold), Enkhbat Badar-Uugan (silver)
Gojan has had the tougher road, but I think he doesn't have enough offense to keep up with Enkhbat
57kg - Vasyl Lomachenko (gold), Shahin Imranov (silver)
60kg - Alexey Tishchenko (gold), Yordenis Ugas (silver)
Could go either way.
64kg - Roniel Iglesias (gold), Alexis Vastine (silver)
No one can score on Iglesias, Vastine has a seven inch height advantage over Diaz.
69kg - Hanati Silamu (gold), Bakhyt Sarsekbayev (silver)
Just a gut pick - Banteaux looks like he should win
75kg - Emilio Correa (gold), James DeGale (silver)
81kg - Kenny Egan (gold), Yerkebulan Shynaliyev (silver)
91kg - Rakhim Chakhiev (gold), Clemente Russo (silver)
Acosta hasn't been able to score much
91+kg - Zhang Zhilei (gold), David Price (silver)
Another gut pick