Thread: WBA explores scoring reform!

Will use half-point in regional title fights


In some of the highlights of its 86th Annual Convention that finished on Friday in Chengdu, China, the World Boxing Association (WBA) announced that it will implement the use of the half point system to score its regional title fights, effective immediately. Therefore, the WBA becomes the first international boxing sanctioning body to support the utilization of a new scoring system that may revolutionize boxing. “The half point is an extra tool given to judges to have a better way to decide on close rounds and to differentiate a round won by a close margin from a round barely won. At the end of the day, the final score would reflex more accurately what had happened in the fight,

http://www.fightnews.com/wba19.htm


What do you think about this ??

Well...I can not say I am really into some of the changes they are doing or looking into doing..EG the 9 and 11 rounder things but I give them credit for trying to change things a bit maybe for the better maybe for the worse only time will tell but at least they are giving it a sincere effort

If they really want scoring reform, they would work on removing officials who were used as hand puppets by big name promoters.

Well the WBA is the oldest of all the organisations, so perhaps that should be viewed as an indicator thatthe organisation will surge on into the future, unlike the faltering WBC.

i remember someone trying to make the case that it makes the fight scoring more accurate, but to me it seems more confusing and greater chance of number errors? we have judges who cant even add properly to begin with lol. or dont know how to properly score multipul knockdown rounds, take away point rounds etc.

i see it being a bigger mess IMO?

Originally Posted by DAVID TUA

i remember someone trying to make the case that it makes the fight scoring more accurate, but to me it seems more confusing and greater chance of number errors? we have judges who cant even add properly to begin with lol. or dont know how to properly score multipul knockdown rounds, take away point rounds etc.

i see it being a bigger mess IMO?

exactly what i'm thinking..

Originally Posted by Althugz

Originally Posted by DAVID TUA

i remember someone trying to make the case that it makes the fight scoring more accurate, but to me it seems more confusing and greater chance of number errors? we have judges who cant even add properly to begin with lol. or dont know how to properly score multipul knockdown rounds, take away point rounds etc.

i see it being a bigger mess IMO?

exactly what i'm thinking..

ahah id cool click you whatever that means, but i think im not allowed to until i reach a certain amount of posts right?

Imagine being the guy who lost a fight by half a point...

They're still saying that somebody won the round... so it doesn't eliminate the controversy of giving a close round to one fighter over another.

Just gives closer, frustrating scores.

Sounds like a shit idea.

Can you even imagine some of Teddy Atlas' scorecards if this crazy rule got implemented?

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Sounds like a S*** idea.

Can you even imagine some of Teddy Atlas' scorecards if this crazy rule got implemented?

Dont worry Bilbo,He would still find a way to score at least 2 or 3 rounds of EVERY SINGLE fight he scores as EVEN .

Its a solid idea. Nothing will ever significantly reduce the robberies that occur but it would definitely help out with the demoralizing draws where you knew someone should've won. All judges should participate in a yearly recertification test which consists of a math refresher course, an eye test, and how to score bouts.

Sounds ridiculous to me, think about it - One fighter could win 8 out of 12 rounds each by only half a point and the other fighter could win only the other four rounds but by a full point and the fight would be ruled a draw. 8 rounds to 4 a draw!

I think the 10point system is fine i mean whats the point...in half a point?

If you win the round you should win the round plain and simple 10-9 if your getting 10-9 and a half
for a close round you would have to win 2 rounds for 1 point?..were is the sense in that..

sorry beerjelly if that basicaly makes the same point as your post i left this post ages before i actaully posted it...

Reform the clinch procedure i say.. why break up a clinch pushing both fighters away from the action. The shorter fighter is at square 1. and the tall fighter is back to his desired range simply thru referee interference, the Tall fighter does not have to work at getting his distance just simply tie up . to me it just encourages more clinches from the taller opponent . negates the chances of a shorter fighter having opportunities to win a fair match. referre quickly breaking the clinch is not the ansewer, its exactly what the taller oppoent wants. the ref should either give the fighters proper time to fight out of the clinch or take points from the clinching fighter from the gate. (I am referring to Heavyweight matches in particular)

I agree about the clinching. A shorter fighter can really be put at a disadvantage if he draws the wrong ref.

I always thought the problem with the 10 point must system was that, except for a knock down or near knock down, a fighter only gets one point whether he wins the round big or not so big. Of course, by winning the round big the fighter does get more assurance of winning that round, but I wondered about a zero point must system.

In a zero point must system the fighter who wins the round gets 1 point, if he wins the round convincingly he gets two points, then he gets a point for each knock down. That way it's easier for a fighter to get more credit for a dominant round.

I suppose you could also just change the philosophy of scoring the 10 point must system, just by using more of the ten points: Win the round marginally, 10-9. Win the round convincingly, 10-8, Win the round convincingly and score a knock down 10-7. etc...