Scoring solution

So sick of these scoring debacles. From Pac-Bradley all the way back to Holyfield – Lewis. I know, it’s been said many times on these forums but boxing really needs to get its act together if it’s to retain any kind of credibility or popularity in the long term. I know there have always been shady elements to boxing and I’m not talking about the kind of controversy caused by press conference brawls and the other WWF-style aspects that have always been there. I’m talking about the integrity and credibility of the sport. So many high-profile fights these days are either total mismatches or are shrouded in some kind of controversy. I know we can’t really change much just by posting on a forum, but I wondered what you wise and knowledgeable folk think of this idea.
Judging in boxing is obviously a subjective thing, so there will always be room for interpretation as long as it’s a matter of opinion, and this will always leave room for controversy. But we have CompuBox, so we know what percentage of punches were thrown and how many of them have landed. So why don’t they just use that? It seems to me to be a totally fair way of deciding a bout. Obviously you should still be able to win with a KO or TKO, but in a fight where you would usually go to the score-cards, just go to the stats. I know aggression and style are factors in the decision, but overall if you land proportionately more punches than your opponent across the full duration of the fight, you’ve clearly fought better. I can’t really see any situation where this isn’t the case. You might have fought valiantly and thrown a million punches but if they haven’t landed then you haven’t boxed effectively and therefore don’t deserve to win. I’m not talking about amateur scoring, where you just get a point for landing a punch, I’m talking about a percentage, so the punches landed are compared to the punches thrown and whoever has the best percentage wins the fight.
This would put a stop to ‘home-town judge’ decisions, scoring discrepancies and any other judging controversies. Any points deducted by the referee can still be taken into account, the doctor can still stop the fight on cuts or whatever. I really can’t see any reason why it wouldn’t work. As I say, I know this won’t change anything in real life, but hypothetically what do you fellas think?

There are problems with this system though:

1) Combubox is not accurate, it seems just as prone to human error as the judges

2) What happens if one fighter lands 1000 punches in round one, then nothing for the next 11 and get's beat 11-1 on rounds, but has a better punch stat record? Combubox over a whole fight doesn't give an accurate account of what happened.


Somethign needs to be done, I'm just not sure that is it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

There are problems with this system though:

1) Combubox is not accurate, it seems just as prone to human error as the judges

2) What happens if one fighter lands 1000 punches in round one, then nothing for the next 11 and get's beat 11-1 on rounds, but has a better punch stat record? Combubox over a whole fight doesn't give an accurate account of what happened.


Somethign needs to be done, I'm just not sure that is it

---

I agree if we just go to the stats then a fighter could beat another by clean touches that have no power and physically come out of the fight more beat up, but way ahead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andre

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

There are problems with this system though:

1) Combubox is not accurate, it seems just as prone to human error as the judges

2) What happens if one fighter lands 1000 punches in round one, then nothing for the next 11 and get's beat 11-1 on rounds, but has a better punch stat record? Combubox over a whole fight doesn't give an accurate account of what happened.


Somethign needs to be done, I'm just not sure that is it

---

I agree if we just go to the stats then a fighter could beat another by clean touches that have no power and physically come out of the fight more beat up, but way ahead.

---

I don't think it's possible for someone to land more punches in one round than the other fighter does in the rest of the fight. Has that ever happened? If it is possible I would say it's likely to be so rare as to be irrelevant. Although I understand your point, I guess the current system of scoring round by round would have to be scrapped if this system was adopted. Unless they used a percentage-per-round system. I guess that would be fairer.
And I agree that CompuBox isn't 100% accurate, but I'm not suggesting the judges are making mistakes. Maybe I'm being cynical but I'd say these results have more to do with the amount of money generated from a rematch than any errors made in the scoring. CompuBox might not be 100% accurate but at least it has no concept of wealth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphanx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andre

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

There are problems with this system though:

1) Combubox is not accurate, it seems just as prone to human error as the judges

2) What happens if one fighter lands 1000 punches in round one, then nothing for the next 11 and get's beat 11-1 on rounds, but has a better punch stat record? Combubox over a whole fight doesn't give an accurate account of what happened.


Somethign needs to be done, I'm just not sure that is it

---

I agree if we just go to the stats then a fighter could beat another by clean touches that have no power and physically come out of the fight more beat up, but way ahead.

---

I don't think it's possible for someone to land more punches in one round than the other fighter does in the rest of the fight. Has that ever happened? If it is possible I would say it's likely to be so rare as to be irrelevant. Although I understand your point, I guess the current system of scoring round by round would have to be scrapped if this system was adopted. Unless they used a percentage-per-round system. I guess that would be fairer.
And I agree that CompuBox isn't 100% accurate, but I'm not suggesting the judges are making mistakes. Maybe I'm being cynical but I'd say these results have more to do with the amount of money generated from a rematch than any errors made in the scoring. CompuBox might not be 100% accurate but at least it has no concept of wealth.

---

Yup, we were discussing how whacky compubox is for backing up a claim that a fighter won/lost just the other day. It doesn't measure weight of shots, how clean the punch connected etc. I also used the Mayweather vs Castillo 1 example where Floyd was well ahead (if I remember right) on compubox by Round 6. No way you can judge a fight with compubox.

You'd get far more wafty results if you let Compubox decide the outcomes of fights...and then we'd point fingers at the two vegetables behind the computer pressing the buttons instead of the judges. Lets for one second imagine compubox was even accurate (it isn't), what makes you think that if judges can be corrupt, then the Compubox operators can't be?

Jim Lampley would make a fine compubox operator : "Oop another shot landed for Pacquiao..and another..oh and there's another..bang..bang bang..bababang!" *Pacquiao hasn't even come out of his corner yet*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

There are problems with this system though:

1) Combubox is not accurate, it seems just as prone to human error as the judges

2) What happens if one fighter lands 1000 punches in round one, then nothing for the next 11 and get's beat 11-1 on rounds, but has a better punch stat record? Combubox over a whole fight doesn't give an accurate account of what happened.


Somethign needs to be done, I'm just not sure that is it

---

im sure they could still do it round by round

biggest issue with using it is it doesnt take anything else into account :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphanx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andre

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

There are problems with this system though:

1) Combubox is not accurate, it seems just as prone to human error as the judges

2) What happens if one fighter lands 1000 punches in round one, then nothing for the next 11 and get's beat 11-1 on rounds, but has a better punch stat record? Combubox over a whole fight doesn't give an accurate account of what happened.


Somethign needs to be done, I'm just not sure that is it

---

I agree if we just go to the stats then a fighter could beat another by clean touches that have no power and physically come out of the fight more beat up, but way ahead.

---

I don't think it's possible for someone to land more punches in one round than the other fighter does in the rest of the fight. Has that ever happened? If it is possible I would say it's likely to be so rare as to be irrelevant. Although I understand your point, I guess the current system of scoring round by round would have to be scrapped if this system was adopted. Unless they used a percentage-per-round system. I guess that would be fairer.
And I agree that CompuBox isn't 100% accurate, but I'm not suggesting the judges are making mistakes. Maybe I'm being cynical but I'd say these results have more to do with the amount of money generated from a rematch than any errors made in the scoring. CompuBox might not be 100% accurate but at least it has no concept of wealth.

---

Yup, we were discussing how whacky compubox is for backing up a claim that a fighter won/lost just the other day. It doesn't measure weight of shots, how clean the punch connected etc. I also used the Mayweather vs Castillo 1 example where Floyd was well ahead (if I remember right) on compubox by Round 6. No way you can judge a fight with compubox.

You'd get far more wafty results if you let Compubox decide the outcomes of fights...and then we'd point fingers at the two vegetables behind the computer pressing the buttons instead of the judges. Lets for one second imagine compubox was even accurate (it isn't), what makes you think that if judges can be corrupt, then the Compubox operators can't be?

Jim Lampley would make a fine compubox operator : "Oop another shot landed for Pacquiao..and another..oh and there's another..bang..bang bang..bababang!" *Pacquiao hasn't even come out of his corner yet*

---

Ah, see this is why I opened this up to people more knowledgeable than myself. I didn't know Compubox had human operators. Although now that I think of it I don't really know how I thought it worked, since there are no electronic contacts in the gloves on on the fighters. Duh. This is why you should think before you open you mouth.
In that case the idea is just as flawed and open to exploitation as the current system, so I guess it's back to the drawing board.

Compubox is much the same as the flawed Olympic style points scoring system. A couple (maybe 3) people sit with buttons to push when they see a shot land.

They must all press their buttons within a split second of each other for the shot to count.

The only thing I can think of is maybe 5 judges instead of 3.

If you went to stats winning fights, you may as well have a public phone/ text vote at the end of a fight to decide who the public thought won!

Here is my Idea:

Go with 5 judges instead of 3.

3 of them are Ringside and 2 of them in a sound proof booth watching on a HDTV.

After the fight you take all 5 score cards and remove the 2 cards that have the widest margin from one another..

Leaving you with the final 3 score cards to use.

Example:
Judge 1 Ringside - 118-110 Fighter A - Remove
Judge 2 Ringside - 116-112 Fighter A
Judge 3 Ringside - 116-112 Fighter B - Remove
Judge 4 Booth - 115-113 Fighter B
Judge 5 Booth - 115-113 Fighter A

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Althugz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphanx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andre

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

There are problems with this system though:

1) Combubox is not accurate, it seems just as prone to human error as the judges

2) What happens if one fighter lands 1000 punches in round one, then nothing for the next 11 and get's beat 11-1 on rounds, but has a better punch stat record? Combubox over a whole fight doesn't give an accurate account of what happened.


Somethign needs to be done, I'm just not sure that is it

---

I agree if we just go to the stats then a fighter could beat another by clean touches that have no power and physically come out of the fight more beat up, but way ahead.

---

I don't think it's possible for someone to land more punches in one round than the other fighter does in the rest of the fight. Has that ever happened? If it is possible I would say it's likely to be so rare as to be irrelevant. Although I understand your point, I guess the current system of scoring round by round would have to be scrapped if this system was adopted. Unless they used a percentage-per-round system. I guess that would be fairer.
And I agree that CompuBox isn't 100% accurate, but I'm not suggesting the judges are making mistakes. Maybe I'm being cynical but I'd say these results have more to do with the amount of money generated from a rematch than any errors made in the scoring. CompuBox might not be 100% accurate but at least it has no concept of wealth.

---

Yup, we were discussing how whacky compubox is for backing up a claim that a fighter won/lost just the other day. It doesn't measure weight of shots, how clean the punch connected etc. I also used the Mayweather vs Castillo 1 example where Floyd was well ahead (if I remember right) on compubox by Round 6. No way you can judge a fight with compubox.

You'd get far more wafty results if you let Compubox decide the outcomes of fights...and then we'd point fingers at the two vegetables behind the computer pressing the buttons instead of the judges. Lets for one second imagine compubox was even accurate (it isn't), what makes you think that if judges can be corrupt, then the Compubox operators can't be?

Jim Lampley would make a fine compubox operator : "Oop another shot landed for Pacquiao..and another..oh and there's another..bang..bang bang..bababang!" *Pacquiao hasn't even come out of his corner yet*

---

Just about anything can be measured. Arguablly you could put enough people behind buttons and you could create an analog meter of effective punches. There is another problem and that is some fighters absorb punches with lees effective reult than others having more devasting results. So not only is the fight being watched subjective, the effect on the fighter is also subjective.

Out of courisity when was the first time you recall jim lampley use "bang" in his commentary?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 0james0

Compubox is much the same as the flawed Olympic style points scoring system. A couple (maybe 3) people sit with buttons to push when they see a shot land.

They must all press their buttons within a split second of each other for the shot to count.

The only thing I can think of is maybe 5 judges instead of 3.

If you went to stats winning fights, you may as well have a public phone/ text vote at the end of a fight to decide who the public thought won!

---

Not if they were official and indisputable stats. I accept that introducing human error into the mix makes my original idea unworkable but if there was a way of generating accurate punch statistics I still think it would less open to accusations of corruption than the current system. I also agree with what has been said about the weight of the punches and how cleanly they land and other factors, but bear in mind I'm not claiming it would be a perfect system, just that it would be better than the current one.

After the fight, the fighters should be made to have sex with Corona ring girls (has to be Corona) and who ever can't finish is obviously a looser ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus

After the fight, the fighters should be made to have sex with Corona ring girls (has to be Corona) and who ever can't finish is obviously a looser ;D

---

And if neither of them can finish we go to the scorecards?

No seriously I always break rounds up into three minute segments (but also break those segments in half... Just incase a big punch is landed in the first half but then succeeded by 30 seconds of solid jabs to the face from the other guy) and judge if that minute was won clearly or closely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cnote111

Here is my Idea:

Go with 5 judges instead of 3.

3 of them are Ringside and 2 of them in a sound proof booth watching on a HDTV.

After the fight you take all 5 score cards and remove the 2 cards that have the widest margin from one another..

Leaving you with the final 3 score cards to use.

Example:
Judge 1 Ringside - 118-110 Fighter A - Remove
Judge 2 Ringside - 116-112 Fighter A
Judge 3 Ringside - 116-112 Fighter B - Remove
Judge 4 Booth - 115-113 Fighter B
Judge 5 Booth - 115-113 Fighter A

---

decent idea :)