Judges Scoring - My new System

[erics44]

mate boxing is the most corrupt sport in the world

or at least out of the sports i take note of

the burns beltram fight was a clear example

the klits pay the refs millions for their fights, if they do a good job they get to ref again and get another massive pay day, a good job involves letting wlad hold to the extreme

a bradley win in brad pac 1 paved the way to a rematch and another massive payday for their promoter, a pac win and the rematch would never have happened

I scored the burns fight a draw.

But that was mainly due to a style thing.. I don't like the whole "get you against the ropes and hit your arms" shit and that is basically all Beltran did but I enjoyed a guy with a broken jaw landing little counters when spinning off the ropes.

I'm Scottish also, but I'd like to think I'm fairer than that!

i could watch burns beltram again just to make sure but at the time i thought beltram won clearly

[ryanman]

mate boxing is the most corrupt sport in the world

or at least out of the sports i take note of

the burns beltram fight was a clear example

the klits pay the refs millions for their fights, if they do a good job they get to ref again and get another massive pay day, a good job involves letting wlad hold to the extreme

a bradley win in brad pac 1 paved the way to a rematch and another massive payday for their promoter, a pac win and the rematch would never have happened

I scored the burns fight a draw.

But that was mainly due to a style thing.. I don't like the whole "get you against the ropes and hit your arms" shit and that is basically all Beltran did but I enjoyed a guy with a broken jaw landing little counters when spinning off the ropes.

I'm Scottish also, but I'd like to think I'm fairer than that!

i could watch burns beltram again just to make sure but at the time i thought beltram won clearly

Oh he did. You can't score rounds to a guy because he has a broken jaw.

[beenKOed]

mate boxing is the most corrupt sport in the world

or at least out of the sports i take note of

the burns beltram fight was a clear example

the klits pay the refs millions for their fights, if they do a good job they get to ref again and get another massive pay day, a good job involves letting wlad hold to the extreme

a bradley win in brad pac 1 paved the way to a rematch and another massive payday for their promoter, a pac win and the rematch would never have happened

I scored the burns fight a draw.

But that was mainly due to a style thing.. I don't like the whole "get you against the ropes and hit your arms" shit and that is basically all Beltran did but I enjoyed a guy with a broken jaw landing little counters when spinning off the ropes.

I'm Scottish also, but I'd like to think I'm fairer than that!

i could watch burns beltram again just to make sure but at the time i thought beltram won clearly

Oh he did. You can't score rounds to a guy because he has a broken jaw.

He wins everyone's respect, which means you might want to see him in the future, so he does win in the long run.
If the fight was competitive that is, who wants to watch an outclassed fighter get battered from corner to corner just to see how much heart he has.

[erics44]

mate boxing is the most corrupt sport in the world

or at least out of the sports i take note of

the burns beltram fight was a clear example

the klits pay the refs millions for their fights, if they do a good job they get to ref again and get another massive pay day, a good job involves letting wlad hold to the extreme

a bradley win in brad pac 1 paved the way to a rematch and another massive payday for their promoter, a pac win and the rematch would never have happened

I scored the burns fight a draw.

But that was mainly due to a style thing.. I don't like the whole "get you against the ropes and hit your arms" shit and that is basically all Beltran did but I enjoyed a guy with a broken jaw landing little counters when spinning off the ropes.

I'm Scottish also, but I'd like to think I'm fairer than that!

i could watch burns beltram again just to make sure but at the time i thought beltram won clearly

Oh he did. You can't score rounds to a guy because he has a broken jaw.

He wins everyone's respect, which means you might want to see him in the future, so he does win in the long run.
If the fight was competitive that is, who wants to watch an outclassed fighter get battered from corner to corner just to see how much heart he has.

whats your point?

[Britkid]

Judging in boxing is by definition an opinion, all be it an official one that can/will affect peoples careers.

Short of turning the sport into something similar to fencing, the only thing that can be done is to make sure those judges who are chosen to score a fight are considered qualified to do so by their peers.

But this is boxing, and that has not and most likely will not ever happen.

So just go along with the ride, and look at the positives; there is always going to be a lot to talk about in boxing forums!

[Fenster]

The problem with that method is the same as the one ringside - people interpret action different regardless of where they're watching from.

Two judges can watch the same TV footage yet come to the opposite conclusion - and explain why they're opinion is the correct one. We all do it every week here. Thousands of people are watching the exact same TV coverage yet argue about who won what.

You regularly have commentators/pundits sitting together on the exact same table, so they have an identical viewpoint, and the benefit of monitors for replays and what not, yet they see a different winner.

[Silkeyjoe]

The problem with that method is the same as the one ringside - people interpret action different regardless of where they're watching from.

Two judges can watch the same TV footage yet come to the opposite conclusion - and explain why they're opinion is the correct one. We all do it every week here. Thousands of people are watching the exact same TV coverage yet argue about who won what.

You regularly have commentators/pundits sitting together on the exact same table, so they have an identical viewpoint, and the benefit of monitors for replays and what not, yet they see a different winner.

Precisely. Some of the calls judges make are shocking, but a lot of shit they get is when they have scored 1 or 2 rounds differently then some forum poster has. we have no idea what angle he has seen the fight from. I was at an amateur show last friday and decided to sit the opposite side of the ring to a mate. The majority of the time we came out with the same winner but the amount of times we had scored rounds differently was remarkable.

[Bill Paxtom]

Scoring

There is no theory at all.

[erics44]

The problem with that method is the same as the one ringside - people interpret action different regardless of where they're watching from.

Two judges can watch the same TV footage yet come to the opposite conclusion - and explain why they're opinion is the correct one. We all do it every week here. Thousands of people are watching the exact same TV coverage yet argue about who won what.

You regularly have commentators/pundits sitting together on the exact same table, so they have an identical viewpoint, and the benefit of monitors for replays and what not, yet they see a different winner.

all very true but a boring answer

there is some of that but theres also some corruption issues

[Primo Carnera]

The problem with that method is the same as the one ringside - people interpret action different regardless of where they're watching from.

Two judges can watch the same TV footage yet come to the opposite conclusion - and explain why they're opinion is the correct one. We all do it every week here. Thousands of people are watching the exact same TV coverage yet argue about who won what.

You regularly have commentators/pundits sitting together on the exact same table, so they have an identical viewpoint, and the benefit of monitors for replays and what not, yet they see a different winner.

Certainly different judges will judge prioritising different things (going forward, aggression, punch output , punch success,power punches vs Jabs, etc. ) you're never going to stop that, but there would be no outside input and if a judge was way out e.g. Canelo vs PBF (Draw) , they would have a much harder job justifying it.
and definitely , as stated many times before by people, I'm all for them going before the relevant board having to explain how they saw the fight the way they did.
ps. sorry Vendettos, don't agree with your Burns v Beltran theory.

[powerpuncher]

I never bought into the idea that the judges have unfortunate angles at ringside because if that were true, it would have been fixed long ago. Judges would score a fight, get reprimanded for it, rewatch the fight on tape and say "I couldn't see any of that from where I was sitting." Judges judge many fights so they have many opportunities to say that the seating isn't ideal for judging.

Corrupt judging is basically the problem IMO. the only way to fix it is for judges to have their check withheld and even suspended for really bad decisions. My problem with bad decisions is that there is no way it's a coincidence that all boxing writers, forum members, normal viewers, etc all have the fight for one fighter and it just so happens that 2 judges score it for the other fighter. If it happened once it could be a coincidence, but when it happens all the time, there is something going on.

Honestly, I think the best scorers are the Showtime ringside unofficial judges. I feel like they do the best because they usually have around what I have (which says a lot because I'm the best boxing judge).