Open Scoring

[MrFactor]

I think many who hate open scoring and the way it was presented in the Canelo/Trout fight may have really hated it because of the horrific scores read in the 8th round. If that score reflected a dead even fight, I dont think there would be as much backlash. I think the score shown after the 8th round that showed Trout trailing badly that pissed everybody off. Many, including Trout(to some degree) thought the fight was pretty much over unless Trout got a KO. Hey, even Stevie Wonder's scorecard had it close after 8.

I think open scoring can be done with success. I think it should be done after each round. I know the crowd may then sway the judges at ringside, just a bit after the scores are read. I also think that maybe there should be 5 Judges. 3 at ringside and 2 in a secluded room with a few monitors watching the fight with no replays or commentary just to balance the sway of the crowd noise. The ringside judges, particularly for this fight may get swayed way too much by the crowd. The secluded judges will see the fight in a more objective way. As it is now, we know judges are only human and dont have the benefit of replay, as we do. So they may see a scoring shot that didnt really score. That was also very evident in Pacquiao/Bradley. I think that happened to the benefit or detriment of both guys in Canelo/Trout.

I think the 8th round score just gave us a preview of what we saw at the end when the scorecards were tallied. The disappointment was the same, just earlier. If they showed the scores after each round, then Trout could have decided to get busier earlier. Of course its going to change the way the guy fights. I dont see anything wrong with that. In football if you are down by 20 points late in the 2nd quarter, you might start passing more. You change your approach to try to score more. In football they dont hold the score until late in the 3rd quarter and you find out the score is 40 to 10. And your team is the one with 10. Outside of some miracle, your not gonna win. Lets the scores be shown after each round. The judges may even be more honest that way.

[brickcityboxing]

I've always been a fan of open scoring. I thought that it would deter judges from handing in bogus scorecards especially if scores are shown to the viewers on a round by round basis. Most fans don't see the actual scorecards after a fight and can only guess which rounds the judges scored for a fighter. But it didnt seem to have any effect on the judges bias in the case of trout/Canelo and if anything kind of changed the outcome of the fight (trout pressing, Canelo fighting off his backfoot). I'm not really sure what my feelings on open scoring are anymore.

[bojangles1987]

I hate it. Even if the scores are correct, I hate it. I want that doubt in both fighters' minds, pushing them to close the fight the best they can.

[Danny Gunz]

I think open scoring could be used, and be a better option, if they modified scoring a little.

Like after the 8th if a fighter is way ahead he can be deducted a point if he avoids contact or doesn't engage in order to just coast to a victory.

[bigcursedawg]

I have mixed feelings on open scoring. It has pros and cons. Open scoring can let a fighter know he has to go for the ko, but at the same time the fighter that is up on the cards will just try to coast through the last few rounds in most cases. If Canelo didn't know he was up on the cards after the 8th both corners would have probably thought the fight was close and both fighters would have tried to finish the fight strong IMO. If Canelo thought it was a close fight he would've tried to win the 12th round, instead he took no chances because he knew victory was in hand. Canelo Trout would've been a better fight had they not used open scoring.

[Kris Silver]

It has pro's and con's but overall given the amount of controversies in judging, I think any kind of increased transparency is an overriding good thing fundamentally.

There's hardly any sports really, whereby the athlete's don't know how they are 'scoring'. Whether they are ahead or behind.

It does matter and hiding the round by round scoring from the fans is one thing, from the athlete's is another.

A lot of rematches could be avoided as-well imo, as once the boxer gets a small insight as to how their work is being viewed by the judges, both have an open transparent opportunity to just tweak what they are doing within their ability.

That happens in all sports, you're tested as to what you do with being ahead or behind. Some improve knowing they are ahead, some don't. Some improve knowing they are behind, some don't. It goes all ways.

[bigcursedawg]

I've always been a fan of open scoring. I thought that it would deter judges from handing in bogus scorecards especially if scores are shown to the viewers on a round by round basis. Most fans don't see the actual scorecards after a fight and can only guess which rounds the judges scored for a fighter. But it didnt seem to have any effect on the judges bias in the case of trout/Canelo and if anything kind of changed the outcome of the fight (trout pressing, Canelo fighting off his backfoot). I'm not really sure what my feelings on open scoring are anymore.

WBC title fights announce the scores to the crowd after the 4th and 8th rounds, but not in the US. I know they do it in Japan, Thailand, and Mexico.

[Rockin']

open scoring= garbage ................. Rockin'

[WesleySnipes]

I hate it. Even if the scores are correct, I hate it. I want that doubt in both fighters' minds, pushing them to close the fight the best they can.

same here!

[MrFactor]

Do people stop watching football games that are blowouts at the end of the 3rd quarter? Of course they do. In football, basketball and basebll, there int a home run that can make up for huge point deficits. Boxing has that. You can still get knocked out with 1 second to go in the 12th round.