Open Scoring

[gyrokai]

Okay, re-read your argument, and you sound like a reasonable guy... so here we go.


In 1999, Showtime used open scorecards for a couple of matches.

One of them was Mark Johnson, he was ahead... what did he do..... he raaaaannn away the last four rounds.

Okay... one example. Lets have another.

During that time Sharmba Mitchell was going to do the open cards too...

What did he do when he found he was ahead? You guessed it. He RAAAAAANNN!!!

This is not new either, years ago, my great Hero did it too?
You want to guess who that is?

MUHAMMAD ALI He did the exact same thing, Angelo Dundee, being the smart trainer that he is, had a guy, part of the corner, keep an eye on the television Open Scores as the fight was going on. So Angelo and Ali would know which rounds to take off and which to win... can you guess how it ended? ... ? .... ? .... ? Ali won by decision on a looooonnng night.


I HAVE MY examples and evidence. Do you have yours?

Look, I don't have an especially strong opinion about this. I spoke up in the first place because I thought that raising fighters' potential "discouragement" as the reason not to have open scoring was ridiculous. I'm not surprised you can point to examples of fighters running when they're ahead. It happens even without open scoring when it's clear enough that one guy has a big lead, and it would happen even more under open scoring. I'm just pointing out that there is an upside too--in close fights, the guy who finds he's losing will fight harder. I pointed out Taylor-Hopkins I as one example of where open scoring might have made a fight better, and I can remember watching the Sam Peter robbery against James Toney and thinking that it didn't sound too crazy when Freddy Roach was advocating for open scoring afterward. I don't think Sam Peter would have started running, and I think James Toney would have ended up outlanding Peter by even more than he already did in the fight as a result.

So for me, the question is going to be answered by determining whether there are more (a) big fights that are wide enough to be foregone conclusions by the end of the 8th round (and where the losing fighter doesn't have 1-punch KO power) or (b) big fights that are actually closer on the cards than the fighters believe the fight is. If it's (a), then agreed--open scoring is bad for the sport; if it's (b), then it would be on-balance good for the sport. I don't have statistics on this so I really don't know what the answer is.

CC good sport.

Both those problems are..... are NOT open scoring problems.

1) The fighter Hopkins.... He didn't do shyte in the begining rounds. Even his trainer said so.

2) The judge scored it wrong.... but here's the kicker... it wasn't a "robbery" that word is abused. It was a close fight in that what do you score, powerful punches or clean effective punches. In that case, I think that James deserved the nod, but by no means is it a robbery. Knowing or not knowing, a fighter has to fight their heart out in the last rounds to secure a victory. But even if it was open, you'd think Roach would STILL cry foul. He would too, because Roach is a Big BABY! haha Which is why I'd want him as a trainer, to protect me.

As I said....Both those problems are..... are NOT open scoring problems.

Open scoring; prepare for boring azz fights. It's much easier to run away than to engage and fight. Thats common sense dude.