BoxRec

Is there any hope? Serious question.

There has GOT to be a better way to score these fights.

Maybe FIVE judges?

Use the press at ringside and take an average?

Have a computer score them?

I can see why there is corruption in some cases of building up a young fighter but there's no rational explanation for the Bradley-Chaves result. It benefits...nobody.

It's gotten just so, so, so bad something has gotta change. And soon.

Lets get something straight Bradley did not CLEARLY win that fight. I thought he edged it but the way some people are going on about it is just daft. The US commentators were praising Bradley at one point and his punch actually hit the rope!

That said I do agree with you, some of the scoring in general is absolutely ridiculous.

Ian1973 wrote:Lets get something straight Bradley did not CLEARLY win that fight. I thought he edged it but the way some people are going on about it is just daft. The US commentators were praising Bradley at one point and his punch actually hit the rope!

That said I do agree with you, some of the scoring in general is absolutely ridiculous.

Yeah man, everyone at press row got it wrong too.

diddy wrote:

Ian1973 wrote:Lets get something straight Bradley did not CLEARLY win that fight. I thought he edged it but the way some people are going on about it is just daft. The US commentators were praising Bradley at one point and his punch actually hit the rope!

That said I do agree with you, some of the scoring in general is absolutely ridiculous.

Yeah man, everyone at press row got it wrong too.

Everyone said the Titanic wouldn't sink. I don't listen to anyone else, I use my own eyes and own mind, that's what they were given me for.

Could be worth seeing an optician there then buddy

What can be done to "save" boxing? We could turn our attention away from the crap fests from the US and give attention to fighters doing it right, don't think I've seen John Riel Casimero have his name mentioned on here recent but he did what fighters should do more often. The judges are crap, I'd like to see fighters try to render the judges unnecessary as often as possible

Would it be worth transferring the amateur system to the pro's, scoring by punches landed?

Ian1973 wrote:Would it be worth transferring the amateur system to the pro's, scoring by punches landed?

You need something to compute power shots tho. Thats the problem with that system. We dont need tappers like Malignaggi being undefeated.

Boycott. There can't be 5 judges that's too costly for this "poor man's sport". I guess tonight's result was to make Chaves look respectable so that Arum can keep milking him. Someone should come up with a boxing league where the matches have endless rounds until someone stops or just quits.

diddy wrote:

Ian1973 wrote:Would it be worth transferring the amateur system to the pro's, scoring by punches landed?

You need something to compute power shots tho. Thats the problem with that system. We dont need tappers like Malignaggi being undefeated.

I understand. I just don't see what the answer is. What you're dealing with right now is subjectivity and that is unsatisfactory as that is subconsciously favouring an opinion or a personal preference over fact.

Some of the cards this year alone have been bordering on insane. The sport cannot go on like that.

Ian1973 wrote:

diddy wrote:

Ian1973 wrote:Would it be worth transferring the amateur system to the pro's, scoring by punches landed?

You need something to compute power shots tho. Thats the problem with that system. We dont need tappers like Malignaggi being undefeated.

I understand. I just don't see what the answer is. What you're dealing with right now is subjectivity and that is unsatisfactory as that is subconsciously favouring an opinion or a personal preference over fact.

Some of the cards this year alone have been bordering on insane. The sport cannot go on like that.

I'd rather the judges watch the fights on TV monitors with no sound. Watching at ringside their view can be skewed when a fighter is on the other side of the ring, or by the ref. On TV you see everything with no obstructions.

I'd rather the judges watch the fights on TV monitors with no sound. Watching at ringside their view can be skewed when a fighter is on the other side of the ring, or by the ref. On TV you see everything with no obstructions.

The thing is people are subconsciously affected by "a name". If Floyd Mayweather does something subconsciously it is seen as a deliberate act of quality, if Joe Bloggs does it it's seen as a lucky shot or "did he really mean that"?

The "name", while subjectivity is involved, is always going to be seen in a more positive light.

5 judges won't help in some instances, floyd/ maidana2 was manipulated by the ref not letting maidana fight on the inside, floyd holding, you need to start by having officials from other country's than the fighters nationality adjudicate the bout, they need a better, more clearly established requirement for scoring rounds and actually penalise fighters for fouls, obviously I'm referring to ppv fights where the cost would cover the judges travel expenses

I like the idea of judges utilising monitors when the fight is on the opposite side of the ring to where they are sitting, or where their vision is i,paired (seems to be a major problem over this last weekend !!). so they are not purely relying on the monitor but it there if need be.

Have system of appeal? Not sure how that would work, mind.

I think I had Bradley winning 9-3, it was a bit of a shock to hear the cards.

Lenny Cravats wrote:I think I had Bradley winning 9-3, it was a bit of a shock to hear the cards.

Seems I'm massively outnumbered here. Was no-one else really disappointed with Bradley's performance? I expected him to box, all I saw was a scruffy scrap and to be honest a bit of a bore fest. It amazes me that the American fans booed Thurman's quality boxing yet seemingly were happy with Bradley's classless, get stuck in attitude.

I don't get it.

boxing as such is doing just fine.

diddy wrote:
Use the press at ringside and take an average?

This seems to be the easiest solution. If we had 10 guys or whatever scoring the fight the chances of bad decisions have got to be pretty small.

Ian1973 wrote:Would it be worth transferring the amateur system to the pro's, scoring by punches landed?

Absolutely not.
Pro boxing isn't a punch counting contest, it's about EFFECTIVE punching.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

diddy wrote:
Use the press at ringside and take an average?

This seems to be the easiest solution. If we had 10 guys or whatever scoring the fight the chances of bad decisions have got to be pretty small.

Funnily enough that would represent a move back to the 1900s era of newspaper decisions.

If judges are corrupt, whatever you do won't help. They can look at monitors and still make the same decision they were paid/blackmailed/forced to make.

What needs to be done is stricter reviews of questionable scoring or ref performance and banning judges for life.

easy - one governing body

like FIFA, IAAF, IOC, ICC just to name a few

cold187 wrote:easy - one governing body

like FIFA, IAAF, IOC, ICC just to name a few

AIBA is working on that and with the President being a billionaire, don't count him out. It will take some time and will be interesting to watch how it goes. Anything is better then the current ABC system of corruption.

Perseus wrote:

Ian1973 wrote:Would it be worth transferring the amateur system to the pro's, scoring by punches landed?

Absolutely not.
Pro boxing isn't a punch counting contest, it's about EFFECTIVE punching.

AIBA has switched to pro style 10 point must system and no headgear. The computer scoring days are over, thank f#ck.

ikorolev wrote:If judges are corrupt, whatever you do won't help. They can look at monitors and still make the same decision they were paid/blackmailed/forced to make.

What needs to be done is stricter reviews of questionable scoring or ref performance and banning judges for life.

^ This.