We can fly to mars, but cant have perfect scoring in boxing?

[RonnyJ]

robberys, gift descisions and strange SD, MD or simply delusional scoring.
we need computer scoring, a computer is unemotional, he just scores, only problem is, a computer would have a hard time to judge the difference between a soft and hard punch landed. maybe computer system for counting shots landed and additional a human judge who presses a button when someone landed a big shot.

it has to be a mix. i remember a very interresting video on yutu, when floyd fought cotto, maybe some of you know that video. in the video as shown a round (forgot which ne it was) where cotto clearly was the superior boxer in that round, landing shot after shot. the video followed the whole round and counted every landed shot of both boxer, it was a clear cotto round who outlanded him by a lot. at the end, compubox had floyd outlanding cotto in that round by a lot and this is when i knew that scoring was bs. on the other side the video showed a moment where the viewer could see the live scoring punch landing and when floyd punched a crystal clear air punch, guess what happened, punch was counted

i watched derev ggg only one half of the fight, where derev would dominate, but since i didnt watch the whole fight i cant say who truly won, all i know, would we have better scoring than there would be less drama afterwards.

[siablo14]

robberys, gift descisions and strange SD, MD or simply delusional scoring.
we need computer scoring, a computer is unemotional, he just scores, only problem is, a computer would have a hard time to judge the difference between a soft and hard punch landed. maybe computer system for counting shots landed and additional a human judge who presses a button when someone landed a big shot.

it has to be a mix. i remember a very interresting video on yutu, when floyd fought cotto, maybe some of you know that video. in the video as shown a round (forgot which ne it was) where cotto clearly was the superior boxer in that round, landing shot after shot. the video followed the whole round and counted every landed shot of both boxer, it was a clear cotto round who outlanded him by a lot. at the end, compubox had floyd outlanding cotto in that round by a lot and this is when i knew that scoring was bs. on the other side the video showed a moment where the viewer could see the live scoring punch landing and when floyd punched a crystal clear air punch, guess what happened, punch was counted

i watched derev ggg only one half of the fight, where derev would dominate, but since i didnt watch the whole fight i cant say who truly won, all i know, would we have better scoring than there would be less drama afterwards.

Allow multiple judges, i am talking about 50 plus, and you may eliminate shady outcomes in boxing.

[m1kee50]

Or you could try watching the entire fight?

[RonnyJ]

smh

[Contendeh]

At the end of the day, a fight that goes to the cards is going to be subjective to a certain degree.

I don’t think a lot of fans when watching fights actually score fights round by round and are way, way too quick to yell robbery at what in reality is a close fight.

[m1kee50]

At the end of the day, a fight that goes to the cards is going to be subjective to a certain degree.

I don’t think a lot of fans when watching fights actually score fights round by round and are way, way too quick to yell robbery at what in reality is a close fight.

Exactly. they tune out for most of it or are on their phones.

I don't know if you are from the UK or the states, they used to have an option to turn on 'fan commentary' for footie games on SKY.

It might be interesting to have 12 members of the public invited to be boxing judges at a card. All watching from good seats (you could raffle the opportunity), their cards would not affect the fight whatsoever.

You could even have a retired judge give the lucky 12 a training course beforehand, make a tv show out of it.

I think most fans aren't even aware of the criteria for scoring fights,

[Contendeh]

At the end of the day, a fight that goes to the cards is going to be subjective to a certain degree.

I don’t think a lot of fans when watching fights actually score fights round by round and are way, way too quick to yell robbery at what in reality is a close fight.

Exactly. they tune out for most of it or are on their phones.

I don't know if you are from the UK or the states, they used to have an option to turn on 'fan commentary' for footie games on SKY.

It might be interesting to have 12 members of the public invited to be boxing judges at a card. All watching from good seats (you could raffle the opportunity), their cards would not affect the fight whatsoever.

You could even have a retired judge give the lucky 12 a training course beforehand, make a tv show out of it.

I think most fans aren't even aware of the criteria for scoring fights,

American fight fan here.

I think that having a group of fight fans scoring a fight, unofficially, could be a good promotional thing for something like DAZN.

Call it Scoring the Fight or something. Always a chance that people wouldn’t care what 12 random fans would think, but people might be in to just how “off” some fans would be. Worth a shot. You got a good idea there.

[siablo14]

Exactly. they tune out for most of it or are on their phones.

I don't know if you are from the UK or the states, they used to have an option to turn on 'fan commentary' for footie games on SKY.

It might be interesting to have 12 members of the public invited to be boxing judges at a card. All watching from good seats (you could raffle the opportunity), their cards would not affect the fight whatsoever.

You could even have a retired judge give the lucky 12 a training course beforehand, make a tv show out of it.

I think most fans aren't even aware of the criteria for scoring fights,

American fight fan here.

I think that having a group of fight fans scoring a fight, unofficially, could be a good promotional thing for something like DAZN.

Call it Scoring the Fight or something. Always a chance that people wouldn’t care what 12 random fans would think, but people might be in to just how “off” some fans would be. Worth a shot. You got a good idea there.

ESPN Friday Nights used to do that, allow fans to score the fight on Facebook.

[fanman]

Or you could try watching the entire fight?

yes. this was actually an example of a good decision.
ggg being the big favourite, it was shocking to see derevy... do so well at times. but looked at objectively, ggg scored the cleaner harder punches, in most of the rounds.

[Enlightened-One]

robberys, gift descisions and strange SD, MD or simply delusional scoring.
we need computer scoring, a computer is unemotional, he just scores, only problem is, a computer would have a hard time to judge the difference between a soft and hard punch landed. maybe computer system for counting shots landed and additional a human judge who presses a button when someone landed a big shot.

it has to be a mix. i remember a very interresting video on yutu, when floyd fought cotto, maybe some of you know that video. in the video as shown a round (forgot which ne it was) where cotto clearly was the superior boxer in that round, landing shot after shot. the video followed the whole round and counted every landed shot of both boxer, it was a clear cotto round who outlanded him by a lot. at the end, compubox had floyd outlanding cotto in that round by a lot and this is when i knew that scoring was bs. on the other side the video showed a moment where the viewer could see the live scoring punch landing and when floyd punched a crystal clear air punch, guess what happened, punch was counted

i watched derev ggg only one half of the fight, where derev would dominate, but since i didnt watch the whole fight i cant say who truly won, all i know, would we have better scoring than there would be less drama afterwards.

The great thing about people that complain about certain problems that exist in life, is that all they’re capable of identifying are flaws, they are nearly always unable of propose solutions.

If some sort of algorithm could be formulated that used objective judging criteria that was irrefutable in nature, then computer-scoring would be in place, instead of flawed humans providing imperfect opinions, based purely on a variety of subjective barometers.

What you’re essentially asking for is someone to implement a solution to the challenge you’ve posed that ensures that every single boxing fight is scored 100% according to your preferred perception of reality, because anything less would obviously fail to meet your standards!

And that’s the main problem, we’re humans with different opinions and different flaws, so it’s impossible to keep you happy without frustrating others.

[Onetimeonly]

Computer scoring killed Olympic boxing. We need the judges to see the same fight from the same angle on a huge TV with no sound. Even then it's subjective, but give them a fighting chance. I haven't seen a terrible card in a while, if I did it slips my mind.

[boxing_rocks]

There is no such thing as perfect scoring. Many of the shots are partially blocked, so they can be scored or not. Also, landed punches is not the only criteria.

[RonnyJ]

robberys, gift descisions and strange SD, MD or simply delusional scoring.
we need computer scoring, a computer is unemotional, he just scores, only problem is, a computer would have a hard time to judge the difference between a soft and hard punch landed. maybe computer system for counting shots landed and additional a human judge who presses a button when someone landed a big shot.

it has to be a mix. i remember a very interresting video on yutu, when floyd fought cotto, maybe some of you know that video. in the video as shown a round (forgot which ne it was) where cotto clearly was the superior boxer in that round, landing shot after shot. the video followed the whole round and counted every landed shot of both boxer, it was a clear cotto round who outlanded him by a lot. at the end, compubox had floyd outlanding cotto in that round by a lot and this is when i knew that scoring was bs. on the other side the video showed a moment where the viewer could see the live scoring punch landing and when floyd punched a crystal clear air punch, guess what happened, punch was counted

i watched derev ggg only one half of the fight, where derev would dominate, but since i didnt watch the whole fight i cant say who truly won, all i know, would we have better scoring than there would be less drama afterwards.

The great thing about people that complain about certain problems that exist in life, is that all they’re capable of identifying are flaws, they are nearly always unable of propose solutions.

If some sort of algorithm could be formulated that used objective judging criteria that was irrefutable in nature, then computer-scoring would be in place, instead of flawed humans providing imperfect opinions, based purely on a variety of subjective barometers.

What you’re essentially asking for is someone to implement a solution to the challenge you’ve posed that ensures that every single boxing fight is scored 100% according to your preferred perception of reality, because anything less would obviously fail to meet your standards!

And that’s the main problem, we’re humans with different opinions and different flaws, so it’s impossible to keep you happy without frustrating others.

I have solutions

Judges are anonymus/they have no dinner time with promoters or anybody who could give them $ for a favour.

They should be well paid and professional.

The schools who school judges should do a better job.

The judges should judge from a screen, at best without sound. No distractions.

No women judges. They to emotional. You have to be calm focused. Man are better in that job.

And now the most important change,
Judges should make more 10:10 rds.
It simply would be more accurate. I qatch so many fights where in a lot of rds both boxer land nothing but air and guard. How do u score that? Pac against floyd, so often they landing just nothing air or guard. Just 10:10 rds where both didnt do much or when they did they didnt land.

[Lackeos]

No women judges. They to emotional. You have to be calm focused. Man are better in that job.

You're an idiot.

[RonnyJ]

I remember the byrd scorecards.
Canelo against mayweather and GGG.
And the female judge in lewis-holyfield.

[jamesmcdonnell]

The great thing about people that complain about certain problems that exist in life, is that all they’re capable of identifying are flaws, they are nearly always unable of propose solutions.

If some sort of algorithm could be formulated that used objective judging criteria that was irrefutable in nature, then computer-scoring would be in place, instead of flawed humans providing imperfect opinions, based purely on a variety of subjective barometers.

What you’re essentially asking for is someone to implement a solution to the challenge you’ve posed that ensures that every single boxing fight is scored 100% according to your preferred perception of reality, because anything less would obviously fail to meet your standards!

And that’s the main problem, we’re humans with different opinions and different flaws, so it’s impossible to keep you happy without frustrating others.

I have solutions

Judges are anonymus/they have no dinner time with promoters or anybody who could give them $ for a favour.

They should be well paid and professional.

The schools who school judges should do a better job.

The judges should judge from a screen, at best without sound. No distractions.

No women judges. They to emotional. You have to be calm focused. Man are better in that job.

And now the most important change,
Judges should make more 10:10 rds.
It simply would be more accurate. I qatch so many fights where in a lot of rds both boxer land nothing but air and guard. How do u score that? Pac against floyd, so often they landing just nothing air or guard. Just 10:10 rds where both didnt do much or when they did they didnt land.

I wholeheartedly agree with all points I wrote an article years back which said the same, in addition, the fees and accommodation of the judges and other officials should not be paid by the promoter.

Actually except for the bit on female judges. That's just misogyny, just because adelaide Byrd is shocking doesn't mean all women are emotional wrecks incapable of judging a fight.

[Enlightened-One]

The great thing about people that complain about certain problems that exist in life, is that all they’re capable of identifying are flaws, they are nearly always unable of propose solutions.

If some sort of algorithm could be formulated that used objective judging criteria that was irrefutable in nature, then computer-scoring would be in place, instead of flawed humans providing imperfect opinions, based purely on a variety of subjective barometers.

What you’re essentially asking for is someone to implement a solution to the challenge you’ve posed that ensures that every single boxing fight is scored 100% according to your preferred perception of reality, because anything less would obviously fail to meet your standards!

And that’s the main problem, we’re humans with different opinions and different flaws, so it’s impossible to keep you happy without frustrating others.

I have solutions

Judges are anonymus/they have no dinner time with promoters or anybody who could give them $ for a favour.

They should be well paid and professional.

The schools who school judges should do a better job.

The judges should judge from a screen, at best without sound. No distractions.

No women judges. They to emotional. You have to be calm focused. Man are better in that job.

And now the most important change,
Judges should make more 10:10 rds.
It simply would be more accurate. I qatch so many fights where in a lot of rds both boxer land nothing but air and guard. How do u score that? Pac against floyd, so often they landing just nothing air or guard. Just 10:10 rds where both didnt do much or when they did they didnt land.

Your list is based on unsubstatiated assumptions, but can you justify them by providing evidence to support your hypothesis.

For instance:

• Do you know for certain the boxing officials regularly dine with fighters, promoters, TV networks etc. and are unduly influenced by their relationships with those parties?

• Do you know for certain that boxing officials are underpaid and are influenced by the lure of receiving undisclosed payments from corrupt fighters, promoters, TV networks etc?

• You say that schools “should do a better job”, but do you know anything about these so-called schools?

• Apart from a couple of high-profile examples, can you provide proof that draws an accurate comparison of the judging ability of males and females? For example: the percentage of dubious scorecards from all the fights judged during the last five years. Your opinion on this matter portrays yourself as being a misogynist!

And the list goes on-and-on…

No offence but claiming that someone “should do better” isn’t a solution, it’s the ultimate goal. You should be explaining how the ultimate objective can achieved. And you’ve not done that!

[RonnyJ]

I have solutions

Judges are anonymus/they have no dinner time with promoters or anybody who could give them $ for a favour.

They should be well paid and professional.

The schools who school judges should do a better job.

The judges should judge from a screen, at best without sound. No distractions.

No women judges. They to emotional. You have to be calm focused. Man are better in that job.

And now the most important change,
Judges should make more 10:10 rds.
It simply would be more accurate. I qatch so many fights where in a lot of rds both boxer land nothing but air and guard. How do u score that? Pac against floyd, so often they landing just nothing air or guard. Just 10:10 rds where both didnt do much or when they did they didnt land.

Your list is based on unsubstatiated assumptions, but can you justify them by providing evidence to support your hypothesis.

For instance:

• Do you know for certain the boxing officials regularly dine with fighters, promoters, TV networks etc. and are unduly influenced by their relationships with those parties?

• Do you know for certain that boxing officials are underpaid and are influenced by the lure of receiving undisclosed payments from corrupt fighters, promoters, TV networks etc?

• You say that schools “should do a better job”, but do you know anything about these so-called schools?

• Apart from a couple of high-profile examples, can you provide proof that draws an accurate comparison of the judging ability of males and females? For example: the percentage of dubious scorecards from all the fights judged during the last five years. Your opinion on this matter portrays yourself as being a misogynist!

And the list goes on-and-on…

No offence but claiming that someone “should do better” isn’t a solution, it’s the ultimate goal. You should be explaining how the ultimate objective can achieved. And you’ve not done that!

I read the first sentence and right away knew what u were writing was nonsense.

U love to sound smart.

[RonnyJ]

Your list is based on unsubstatiated assumptions, but can you justify them by providing evidence to support your hypothesis.

For instance:

• Do you know for certain the boxing officials regularly dine with fighters, promoters, TV networks etc. and are unduly influenced by their relationships with those parties?

• Do you know for certain that boxing officials are underpaid and are influenced by the lure of receiving undisclosed payments from corrupt fighters, promoters, TV networks etc?

• You say that schools “should do a better job”, but do you know anything about these so-called schools?

• Apart from a couple of high-profile examples, can you provide proof that draws an accurate comparison of the judging ability of males and females? For example: the percentage of dubious scorecards from all the fights judged during the last five years. Your opinion on this matter portrays yourself as being a misogynist!

And the list goes on-and-on…

No offence but claiming that someone “should do better” isn’t a solution, it’s the ultimate goal. You should be explaining how the ultimate objective can achieved. And you’ve not done that!

I read the first sentence and right away knew what u were writing was nonsense.

U love to sound smart.

You asking me question like

"Are you sure that they eat rice in asia, have u proof, do u have ever been there?"

They have dinner party. I have proof, trainers told it to the media who at the dinner partys.

No. I have no proof that promoters pay judges, but why than these big robberys, where the ppv star cash cow is mostly (always) the benifit of a judging in his favour. Foreman/schulz, de la hoya/sturm, canelo/GGG, canelo/lara and many more.

Put it simple, where there are no clear rules and where there is huge amounts of $$$$ there is corruption.

Boxing has no clear rules and huge amounts of money are involved.

No clear rules, ward can tko kovalev by multiply balls punches, buster douglus can be 12 secondes on the canvas without be counted out. Pac can win 11 out of 12 rds and still lose to timmy. Its just a corrupt sport and dinner partys with officials etc dont help.

[kbackup408]

I can see the fella who asked this question fails to acknowledge boxing is a subjective sport - perfect doesn't exist in boxing or in life for that fact!

[Enlightened-One]

I can see the fella who asked this question fails to acknowledge boxing is a subjective sport - perfect doesn't exist in boxing or in life for that fact!

Absolutely spot on!

[RonnyJ]

I can see the fella who asked this question fails to acknowledge boxing is a subjective sport - perfect doesn't exist in boxing or in life for that fact!

You dont seem to understand. It is not about perfect, because perfection can rarly be achieved in any sport.

But if perfection is a 10 and no rules is 1, than we are at 6,5 and it should be around 8,5.

To many big fights have been judged badly, far from perfection, far from atleast ok scoring.

[ewenhay]

This one has all the ingredients for another classic thread

[gilgamesh]

I can't believe we can put a man on the moon, and TASTE THIS COFFEE!

[brilo33]

Boxing is very hard score .if I watch boxing with my dad who has Been watching boxing 60odd years scores fights different to me .to my older brother same. Take the Tyson wilder fight. I thought Tyson won as I I thought he had enough rds and even in last when he got up he came back fighting. But my dad bit more well wilder put the man down twice and thought he won it. Saul v ggg I thought yea ggg first fight but second fight the way Saul changed it up and came at the champ I thought he won. But then I like fighters like BJs I think the way they fight I sometimes judge different . I think Horne beat PAC man .you get real horrible calls in boxing that is what I want to see out .but boxing is hard to score every has there veiw on fighting.i don't think I would want a computer calling it