Evaluate the judging for 2018 (scale 1-10)

[Thomastearns]

I find the trouble is all here in America. Every single time i watch a bout in England, I say in my head "right on". That's exactly how I scored the fight. In England, they are the only judges that have a criteria that is stuck to and I just find all of their decisions to be very responsible for fights and understandable.

In America, it's a mess. If i'm Joshua or Fury, i'm never fighting here. Here the scoring criterium is kept obscure so that they can operate under the clout of darkness to do all of their filthy dealings like they did twice against GGG. I wish i were a Brit so that i could just focus on the talent over there and enjoy the sport that has a ton more honesty and fair play. Here, the sport is an absolute farce. Whoever can make the most money for people in the next fight, they win the decisions.

The grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence.
Judging is questionable everywhere. Stop being fooled

I’ve seen enough of a sample size to form this opinion. Boxing is a major sport to the Brits unlike it is here in states and they are less likely to get away with stealing 2 decisions away from a boxer like GGG in the years biggest fights. GGG would have won both fights vs. Canelo if hosted in England. No doubt in my mind.

British judging is by no means perfect and I doubt whether it's any better or worse than the most of the US, or anywhere else's judging.

What really brings US judging into criminal disrepute is what happens with frustrating regularity in Las Vegas. Unfortunately as long as 'Sin City' happens to be where the cartel operate and the biggest money making fights are held this situation is unlikely to change any time soon.

[caldo2025]

The grass is not always greener on the other side of the fence.
Judging is questionable everywhere. Stop being fooled

I’ve seen enough of a sample size to form this opinion. Boxing is a major sport to the Brits unlike it is here in states and they are less likely to get away with stealing 2 decisions away from a boxer like GGG in the years biggest fights. GGG would have won both fights vs. Canelo if hosted in England. No doubt in my mind.

British judging is by no means perfect and I doubt whether it's any better or worse than the most of the US, or anywhere else's judging.

What really brings US judging into criminal disrepute is what happens with frustrating regularity in Las Vegas. Unfortunately as long as 'Sin City' happens to be where the cartel operate and the biggest money making fights are held this situation is unlikely to change any time soon.

I agree that Vegas is a common crime scene but I’ve seen it happen all over including NY. In America, decisions are always going to favor the A side because they can generate the most money for everyone involved in their next fight or two. It’s why Danny Garcia gets the decision against Herrera. Floyd getting decision over Maidana in first fight. Heck, it’s why GGG got the nod over Jacobs in NY. That fight I had a draw but GGG and Canelo were going to generate so much money that they couldn’t have anything stand in the way of that freefall of cash. Jacobs vs Canelo wouldn’t have drawn the same kind of money.

Most people live to see upsets. Underdogs defying the odds to do something special. It’s almost impossible for boxers to do that nowadays especially in America. The scoring criteria is such a mess. No one knows what wins a round anymore and that just what the crooks killing the sport want.

[tiny_acres]

I’ve seen enough of a sample size to form this opinion. Boxing is a major sport to the Brits unlike it is here in states and they are less likely to get away with stealing 2 decisions away from a boxer like GGG in the years biggest fights. GGG would have won both fights vs. Canelo if hosted in England. No doubt in my mind.

British judging is by no means perfect and I doubt whether it's any better or worse than the most of the US, or anywhere else's judging.

What really brings US judging into criminal disrepute is what happens with frustrating regularity in Las Vegas. Unfortunately as long as 'Sin City' happens to be where the cartel operate and the biggest money making fights are held this situation is unlikely to change any time soon.

I agree that Vegas is a common crime scene but I’ve seen it happen all over including NY. In America, decisions are always going to favor the A side because they can generate the most money for everyone involved in their next fight or two. It’s why Danny Garcia gets the decision against Herrera. Floyd getting decision over Maidana in first fight. Heck, it’s why GGG got the nod over Jacobs in NY. That fight I had a draw but GGG and Canelo were going to generate so much money that they couldn’t have anything stand in the way of that freefall of cash. Jacobs vs Canelo wouldn’t have drawn the same kind of money.

Most people live to see upsets. Underdogs defying the odds to do something special. It’s almost impossible for boxers to do that nowadays especially in America. The scoring criteria is such a mess. No one knows what wins a round anymore and that just what the crooks killing the sport want.

Caldo I consider you a good poster and a reasonable guy
But because you don't agree with decisions on close fights you consider them all crooked.
It makes no sense.
GGG-Canelo 2 was a close fight. I thought GGG won. But not a robbery
Floyd Maidana was another close fight I thought Floyd won but if Maidana would of got the decision I could see it.
GGG vs Jacobs Close but no robbery.

Just because we don't fully agree with the judges does not make them all robberies

[jamamb]

floyd-madiana 1 was a 7-5/8-4 type of win for floyd. totally overplayed as a robbery

[Enlightened-One]

A recap of a really bad set of scores.. This year..

117-110, 118-110 and 119-108 all in favour of Josh Taylor against Victor Postol.

Don't get me wrong, I think the right boxer won, but if someone saw them scorecards in a few years time, it looks like Taylor dominated Postol and you'd have to watch the fight to see..

Scorecards did not give Postol any credit.

Even McGuigan said they were too wide.

What did your scorecards read?

[jamamb]

i had that either 115-112 taylor or 114-113 taylor, cant remember

[tiny_acres]

floyd-madiana 1 was a 7-5/8-4 type of win for floyd. totally overplayed as a robbery

I had it 8-4
Good fight. Fun fight.
But I agree no robbery

[Ruthless-RKO]

A recap of a really bad set of scores.. This year..

117-110, 118-110 and 119-108 all in favour of Josh Taylor against Victor Postol.

Don't get me wrong, I think the right boxer won, but if someone saw them scorecards in a few years time, it looks like Taylor dominated Postol and you'd have to watch the fight to see..

Scorecards did not give Postol any credit.

Even McGuigan said they were too wide.

What did your scorecards read?

114-113 Taylor. The KD won it for him.

You can argue 115-112 or 116-111.. But not what the judges saw.


Taylor...........9-10-9-9-9-10-9-9-10-10-10-10 - 114
Postol..........10-9-10-10-10-9-10-10-9-8-9-9 - 113

[Enlightened-One]

A recap of a really bad set of scores.. This year..

117-110, 118-110 and 119-108 all in favour of Josh Taylor against Victor Postol.

Don't get me wrong, I think the right boxer won, but if someone saw them scorecards in a few years time, it looks like Taylor dominated Postol and you'd have to watch the fight to see..

Scorecards did not give Postol any credit.

Even McGuigan said they were too wide.

What did your scorecards read?

114-113 Taylor. The KD won it for him.

You can argue 115-112 or 116-111.. But not what the judges saw.


Taylor...........9-10-9-9-9-10-9-9-10-10-10-10 - 114
Postol..........10-9-10-10-10-9-10-10-9-8-9-9 - 113

I honestly can’t remember my own scorecards, but I had Taylor winning by a wide margin (not quite as dominant as the judges scored it though).

I distinctly remember being slightly shocked at my wide scoring margin after the fight, even though it was a very competitive bout.

I guess if you score each round in isolation and one fighter wins those three minutes by the smallest of margins, then it’s still a 10-9 round regardless. And if the majority of the subsequent rounds play out in precisely the same way, then the scorecards will inevitably be wide, wrongly suggesting a dominant victory for one fighter, even if the bout itself was highly-competitive and entertaining.

Anyway, I felt the judges got the scoring of the Taylor-Postol fight wrong, but I’ve seen much worse and the right man won, which is all that really matters.

[ValMar]

floyd-madiana 1 was a 7-5/8-4 type of win for floyd. totally overplayed as a robbery

X2.............

[Thomastearns]

I’ve seen enough of a sample size to form this opinion. Boxing is a major sport to the Brits unlike it is here in states and they are less likely to get away with stealing 2 decisions away from a boxer like GGG in the years biggest fights. GGG would have won both fights vs. Canelo if hosted in England. No doubt in my mind.

British judging is by no means perfect and I doubt whether it's any better or worse than the most of the US, or anywhere else's judging.

What really brings US judging into criminal disrepute is what happens with frustrating regularity in Las Vegas. Unfortunately as long as 'Sin City' happens to be where the cartel operate and the biggest money making fights are held this situation is unlikely to change any time soon.

I agree that Vegas is a common crime scene but I’ve seen it happen all over including NY. In America, decisions are always going to favor the A side because they can generate the most money for everyone involved in their next fight or two. It’s why Danny Garcia gets the decision against Herrera. Floyd getting decision over Maidana in first fight. Heck, it’s why GGG got the nod over Jacobs in NY. That fight I had a draw but GGG and Canelo were going to generate so much money that they couldn’t have anything stand in the way of that freefall of cash. Jacobs vs Canelo wouldn’t have drawn the same kind of money.

Most people live to see upsets. Underdogs defying the odds to do something special. It’s almost impossible for boxers to do that nowadays especially in America. The scoring criteria is such a mess. No one knows what wins a round anymore and that just what the crooks killing the sport want.

You're right, but it won't kill the sport. I mean corruption in boxing has gone on for decades.
The boxers themselves don't protest too much because they want the fights and money. They are complicit in the corruption if they know and keep their mouths shut. I dont blame them, we all need money, but if GGG goes to Vegas for a third Canelo fight he can't possibly complain about the decision.

The one exception amongst fighters themselves has been Paulie Malignaggi. If even half of what he has said over the years is true...

Its not all doom and gloom though. Upsets can still happen but most fighters know when they meet the so-called 'A sides' they will need a knockout or stoppage.

Thankfully, the heavyweight division is the toughest to 'fix' because of the higher KO ratio.

[caldo2025]

British judging is by no means perfect and I doubt whether it's any better or worse than the most of the US, or anywhere else's judging.

What really brings US judging into criminal disrepute is what happens with frustrating regularity in Las Vegas. Unfortunately as long as 'Sin City' happens to be where the cartel operate and the biggest money making fights are held this situation is unlikely to change any time soon.

I agree that Vegas is a common crime scene but I’ve seen it happen all over including NY. In America, decisions are always going to favor the A side because they can generate the most money for everyone involved in their next fight or two. It’s why Danny Garcia gets the decision against Herrera. Floyd getting decision over Maidana in first fight. Heck, it’s why GGG got the nod over Jacobs in NY. That fight I had a draw but GGG and Canelo were going to generate so much money that they couldn’t have anything stand in the way of that freefall of cash. Jacobs vs Canelo wouldn’t have drawn the same kind of money.

Most people live to see upsets. Underdogs defying the odds to do something special. It’s almost impossible for boxers to do that nowadays especially in America. The scoring criteria is such a mess. No one knows what wins a round anymore and that just what the crooks killing the sport want.

Caldo I consider you a good poster and a reasonable guy
But because you don't agree with decisions on close fights you consider them all crooked.
It makes no sense.
GGG-Canelo 2 was a close fight. I thought GGG won. But not a robbery
Floyd Maidana was another close fight I thought Floyd won but if Maidana would of got the decision I could see it.
GGG vs Jacobs Close but no robbery.

Just because we don't fully agree with the judges does not make them all robberies

I guess that I should have explained that a little better. I take the scorecards that were filled out per round in those big fights and go back and watch the fights again and again even to see how they scored each round and that’s where you really find ur robberies. Yes, the action overall may be tight but when you see Floyd languishing in the ropes for a whole round as Maidana pounds away with 100 punches and loses the round, that’s how you see the ridiculousness. Same with Canelo. Most people just look at final scores and say “close fight, could have gone either way”. No. It’s crap. I urge you to go back and watch both fights with scorecards in front of you. You can’t ignore it when it’s stairing you in the face.

Furthermore, 90% of the sportswriters scored the 2nd fight for GGG from ringside. 90% but it’s not a robbery? Just because is fight is close doesn’t mean it’s an honest decision.