Judges Scoring - My new System

[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).

[IamInuit]

My theory is that there can only be 3 reasons why in the last year or two (maybe forever), that there has been a massive inconsistency in judging.Things like Canelo getting a draw on one card and losing every round on the others v Floyd. Or Ricky Burns v Beltran. and there are many others.
1.They haven't got a clue - unlikely because they wouldn't get to that position in the first place.
2. They're on the take - Don't want to believe that and in the Canelo instance, why just 1 judge? after all, you need 2 to win the fight.
3. The judges are probably sat in the wrong place. they are right below the ring and not only can they hear a biased crowd making them think that every shot connects, but some shots might look like they connect when they don't. For example (sorry in advance Ross!) I can understand a judge at ringside thinking Eubank nicked it against Saunders (all the talk sport commentators also did on the night!). But watching it again on my own carefully with the benefit of good camera angles etc. it's very clear he probably lost it by 3 rounds, and I know a judge would see it differently to how they first saw it. in the 2nd half of the fight, Eubank was coming forward , but was connecting with very little and looked very crude. However, a judge could easily from the angle he's at think he has taken control of the fight.
My suggestion is that the judges are placed with TV monitors in a room off the main arena to judge the fight. No distractions, no commentary, just what they see. They're there to do a job , and that's the easiest and most efficient way of doing it.
for Obvious reasons, this can only apply to Televised title fights. for the rest, we're gonna have to make do with shit judging.

1.They haven't got a clue - unlikely because they wouldn't get to that position in the first place.

I share your pain. Sadly I honestly don't think some have a clue. I've seen people get lifeguard certification that should not be in charge of a wading pool. Like anything else many of these people were either judges before there was a stringent program and to others they have simply become part of the furniture and at times organization specific. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that a guy like Mayweather gets a certain amount of say. For those who pass the examines its no doubt a hard road of slogging it out in gob fested venues but once they get there they adapt to some of the dirty little secrets or choose another career. How else can one explain some of the absolute garbage decisions rendered over the years?

Its either one of two things. Total incompetence or purchased. How does any competent human being let alone trained 10 point must judge give the fight to Casamayor over Santa Cruz.?? My dogs could have scored that fight. Same with Tiberi/Toney. Yet these people remain employed and some go on to do it again. You know, like a good company person. How did Cj Ross find 6 rounds for Alvarez in the Floyd fight and prior to that the 115/113 for Bradley over Manny? She's a hack. And Ford. Available to the highest bidder. The irony is that Arum was the bidder. That actually bugs me more then the individual bad call is that these charlatans continue on even when the entire world knows they are either bought or totally incompetent.

What I saw on TV is not the same as what I saw that night,” she testified. “I can only go by
what I looked at that night and I scored that accordingly.

Remember that classic? Same person said something to the effect that he view was blocked. Its Eugenia Williams from Holy/Lennox 1. At least in her case she has never done a high profile fight since but she's still working as a judge no doubt ruining careers before they start. Same with Oconnell. Did that guy live once he went back to England?


Full agreement on taking judges right out of ringside. Sound proof booths with a head set and given the same angles we get instead of across from Pam Andersons camel toe or hearing that yelling from Lampley about punches that are not even taking place. The expression "need to knock him out to win" not related to late in the fight is used more and more these days.

They should also be forced to review chapters 3, 5 and 8 of the Association of Boxing Commissions hand book.