BoxRec

Tony1244 wrote:

bigman1968 wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:This hasn't been mentioned, at least I didn't read it:

In modern boxing, fighters act as though results of matches never happened.

RJJ gets Knocked Out by Danny Green. Clamor for a rematch? None. John Ruiz gets KOd in 1 by David Tua, and Ruiz is defending bogus titles for years as though the KO BY 1 never happened.

When Ken Norton was KOd by Garcia, there was a rematch because normalcy demanded it.

Modern day boxing would never have had a Louis-Schmeling 2, the result of the first fight would simply be ignored -- as though it never occurred.

The result of Shmeling-Loius 1 was ignored, actually. Shmeling beat the sh#t out of young Louis, but Louis was the one who got the shot for the title...

The Louis - Scheming fights were only 2 years apart. Amazing how much more activity there was back then. I looked Max up. Interesting career; KO losses to a Gipsy Daniels and Gans. Also amazing those fights occurred in the 1920s in Germany !

caldo2025 wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:The best idea I've heard is expanding the number of judges for a fight to 7 for a better sample size and the judges are offsite in a soundproof room watching and scoring the fight off of TV's.

I would prefer that every PPV buy gets to be a judge. The votes come in for an hour after the fight. The ppv judges' statistical preference counts as one of three judges if it is less than 60%. 60% and above it holds 50% weight, counting as two votes.

The problem I have with the 7 judge soundproof room idea is cost and the logistics of setting it up. Where are these soundproof rooms? Who is monitoring the judging? How are judges selected and trained?

The fan voting model would increase revenue through increased ppv buys thanks to viewer participation. The business model could easily be extended to all live telecasts, creating a revenue stream through the marketing of judging privileges.

How many boxing enthusiasts would purchase an annual package to judge all live broadcast fights? What would you be willing to pay for the right to vote on every fight you watch?

There could be trips and cash prizes integrated easily into that model. It would make boxing more fun for me. I would prefer that each round be judged individually but that would likely be requiring more attention than most people legitimately give any but the marquee matchups.

Not freaking bad dude. Not bad at all. Never heard that idea before.

ValMar wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:

Tanzio wrote: I would prefer that every PPV buy gets to be a judge. The votes come in for an hour after the fight. The ppv judges' statistical preference counts as one of three judges if it is less than 60%. 60% and above it holds 50% weight, counting as two votes.

The problem I have with the 7 judge soundproof room idea is cost and the logistics of setting it up. Where are these soundproof rooms? Who is monitoring the judging? How are judges selected and trained?

The fan voting model would increase revenue through increased ppv buys thanks to viewer participation. The business model could easily be extended to all live telecasts, creating a revenue stream through the marketing of judging privileges.

How many boxing enthusiasts would purchase an annual package to judge all live broadcast fights? What would you be willing to pay for the right to vote on every fight you watch?

There could be trips and cash prizes integrated easily into that model. It would make boxing more fun for me. I would prefer that each round be judged individually but that would likely be requiring more attention than most people legitimately give any but the marquee matchups.

Not freaking bad dude. Not bad at all. Never heard that idea before.

Interesting idea...At least...

Tanzio wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:The best idea I've heard is expanding the number of judges for a fight to 7 for a better sample size and the judges are offsite in a soundproof room watching and scoring the fight off of TV's.

I would prefer that every PPV buy gets to be a judge. The votes come in for an hour after the fight. The ppv judges' statistical preference counts as one of three judges if it is less than 60%. 60% and above it holds 50% weight, counting as two votes.

The problem I have with the 7 judge soundproof room idea is cost and the logistics of setting it up. Where are these soundproof rooms? Who is monitoring the judging? How are judges selected and trained?

The fan voting model would increase revenue through increased ppv buys thanks to viewer participation. The business model could easily be extended to all live telecasts, creating a revenue stream through the marketing of judging privileges.

How many boxing enthusiasts would purchase an annual package to judge all live broadcast fights? What would you be willing to pay for the right to vote on every fight you watch?

There could be trips and cash prizes integrated easily into that model. It would make boxing more fun for me. I would prefer that each round be judged individually but that would likely be requiring more attention than most people legitimately give any but the marquee matchups.

Tony1244 wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

caldo2025 wrote:The best idea I've heard is expanding the number of judges for a fight to 7 for a better sample size and the judges are offsite in a soundproof room watching and scoring the fight off of TV's.

I would prefer that every PPV buy gets to be a judge. The votes come in for an hour after the fight. The ppv judges' statistical preference counts as one of three judges if it is less than 60%. 60% and above it holds 50% weight, counting as two votes.

The problem I have with the 7 judge soundproof room idea is cost and the logistics of setting it up. Where are these soundproof rooms? Who is monitoring the judging? How are judges selected and trained?

The fan voting model would increase revenue through increased ppv buys thanks to viewer participation. The business model could easily be extended to all live telecasts, creating a revenue stream through the marketing of judging privileges.

How many boxing enthusiasts would purchase an annual package to judge all live broadcast fights? What would you be willing to pay for the right to vote on every fight you watch?

There could be trips and cash prizes integrated easily into that model. It would make boxing more fun for me. I would prefer that each round be judged individually but that would likely be requiring more attention than most people legitimately give any but the marquee matchups.

Interesting. Great for fan interest. Nothing gets more attention than asking people what they think.

A couple obvious red flags though. The betting corruption would be blatant. Way too tempting to flood the votes, if you will. Also, if there are more Polish or Mexican fans (and there are) compared to Irish or Swiss fans. Would that be fair to the Irish or Swiss fighter? Not singling out any nationality, you can fill in the blanks with other nationalities, but you can find numerous examples of ALL colors, races, religions, and creeds favoring their brethren. Unfortunate fact of life.

sweetviolenturge wrote:I've been following the sport for over 40 years as well.
And while that makes me sound absolutely ancient, I assure you that I'm a very young-looking, behaving & feeling 55 year old. Which, I know, most of you will dismiss as a "geezer" anyhow, but, I not. So there! LOL.
Anyhow, back to my experience in following boxing. The very first fight that I sat down & watched was the February 20th, 1976 Muhammad Ali title defense vs "The Lion of Flanders" Jean-Pierre Coopman, who Ali KO'd in 5 mostly dreary rounds. An inauspicious debut to be sure, but it interested me enough to watch Ali's next fight a month or so later against Jimmy Young. Who I thought outboxed Ali that night & deserved to be champion. And so did a whole lot of other folks as well.
And that controversy stimulated an even more fervent interest, one which led me to begin watching every heavyweight fight televised, which eventually led to me watching every fight broadcast regardless of weight class & well, here I am today. Still doing it ( sans dust & cobwebs strung about me thank you very much! LOL ).
So, yeah, I have just as much experience as ValMar does, but I believe that I have a much sharper memory, because I can testify to the fact that boxing has been on the very same terminal list that he's convinced that it's currently on since I first began watching the sport 40 years ago when I was 14 years old!
Back then, all the sportwriters thought that the game would die whenever Ali decided to hang up his gloves. Didn't happen.
Then it was Ray Leonard. When he first retired in '82 due to his detached retina, they thought that the sport would fade away post-Leonard. Didn't happen.
I could go on all bloody night stating examples of how & when boxing DIDN'T die.

As for the number of lousy decisions, there's always been bad calls. It hasn't killed the sport yet. Nor has the number of weight classes, which other than the creation in the '90s of the 108 & 105 weight classes is the same as it was 40 years ago.

The number of sanctioning bodies? Back in '76 all the writers were sure that having just the 'BA & 'BC would kill the game. It didn't. And, it hasn't died with four major sanctioning bodies. It's certainly not ideal & I don't like it any more than the next fan, but it is what it is.

What ValMar forgets is that as long as there are fighters that can capture the fans interest & imagination & who are willing to step into the ring with other fighters who have done the same, then boxing will survive. The weight class won't matter, which sanctioning bodies are involved won't matter either. This sport is about the fighters & the fights & that's it. And as long as there are good fights, people will watch. And, the sport will live on.

Peace.
- Jim

Tanzio wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

Tanzio wrote: I would prefer that every PPV buy gets to be a judge. The votes come in for an hour after the fight. The ppv judges' statistical preference counts as one of three judges if it is less than 60%. 60% and above it holds 50% weight, counting as two votes.

The problem I have with the 7 judge soundproof room idea is cost and the logistics of setting it up. Where are these soundproof rooms? Who is monitoring the judging? How are judges selected and trained?

The fan voting model would increase revenue through increased ppv buys thanks to viewer participation. The business model could easily be extended to all live telecasts, creating a revenue stream through the marketing of judging privileges.

How many boxing enthusiasts would purchase an annual package to judge all live broadcast fights? What would you be willing to pay for the right to vote on every fight you watch?

There could be trips and cash prizes integrated easily into that model. It would make boxing more fun for me. I would prefer that each round be judged individually but that would likely be requiring more attention than most people legitimately give any but the marquee matchups.

Interesting. Great for fan interest. Nothing gets more attention than asking people what they think.

A couple obvious red flags though. The betting corruption would be blatant. Way too tempting to flood the votes, if you will. Also, if there are more Polish or Mexican fans (and there are) compared to Irish or Swiss fans. Would that be fair to the Irish or Swiss fighter? Not singling out any nationality, you can fill in the blanks with other nationalities, but you can find numerous examples of ALL colors, races, religions, and creeds favoring their brethren. Unfortunate fact of life.

Nothing insurmountable. The most important part would be choosing the % at which the spectator votes would increase to 50% of the judging weight. I am thinking that 60% is too low. It should probably be more like 75-80%.

This idea is not aimed at cleaning up boxing. It is targeted at increasing popularity and profitability by way of audience participation. It is not really a new idea. It is being utilized in a similar form for tv reality competitions now.

punchoutsb wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

Interesting. Great for fan interest. Nothing gets more attention than asking people what they think.

A couple obvious red flags though. The betting corruption would be blatant. Way too tempting to flood the votes, if you will. Also, if there are more Polish or Mexican fans (and there are) compared to Irish or Swiss fans. Would that be fair to the Irish or Swiss fighter? Not singling out any nationality, you can fill in the blanks with other nationalities, but you can find numerous examples of ALL colors, races, religions, and creeds favoring their brethren. Unfortunate fact of life.

Nothing insurmountable. The most important part would be choosing the % at which the spectator votes would increase to 50% of the judging weight. I am thinking that 60% is too low. It should probably be more like 75-80%.

This idea is not aimed at cleaning up boxing. It is targeted at increasing popularity and profitability by way of audience participation. It is not really a new idea. It is being utilized in a similar form for tv reality competitions now.

It's also relatively similar to old newspaper wins back in the day. I quite like the idea really.

ValMar wrote:Corrupted judges, too many belts....Parker vs Ruiz - an excellent example, two decent (nothing more) HWs fighting for a belt...And, hometown decision, again....I am totally unbiased, but there is no fooking way that Parker won this match. No way !

Grailer wrote:

ValMar wrote:Corrupted judges, too many belts....Parker vs Ruiz - an excellent example, two decent (nothing more) HWs fighting for a belt...And, hometown decision, again....I am totally unbiased, but there is no fooking way that Parker won this match. No way !

More salt please. Takam beat Parker as well I suppose?