judging in boxing

Also, to add to this.. I think much more important is how a ref runs a fight. I think bad refs who make early stoppages, and take points when they shouldn't or don't take points when they should, or don't treat both fighters fairly is more detrimental to the sport. yes, and even beyond that we need to deal with comisioners, holy sh it i think almost every official in boxing is ill prepared for his job, i mean some commisioners are good but others are just horible,

You make some good points. Judging a fight is no walk in the park though. I watched Mayweather-Castillo 1, the first time I watched it I scored it for Floyd. I watched it again, scored it for Castillo. Judges don't get a second chance. I agree with you for the most part though. i agree with you 100% . humans will always make mistakes. If we only we can fit boxers with sensors to measure the impact of the punches.

Also, to add to this.. I think much more important is how a ref runs a fight. I think bad refs who make early stoppages, and take points when they shouldn't or don't take points when they should, or don't treat both fighters fairly is more detrimental to the sport.

I agree but some idiots on here need to learn the difference between a close decision and a flat out robbery. Mayweather-Castillo I was a close victory for Floyd(IMO) or a close victory for Castillo(if thatz what u believe) Who cares what the judges scorecards said it was a close fight. Castillo got his 2nd chance and lost. The End.

Boxing judging is a travesty based on fluff and hot air guidelines. Unfortunately we can do nothing.

"I thought Ultimate Robot Fighting was real like Wreslting, but it turns out is fixed like Boxing" - Phillip J. Frye some of the decisions ive seen i wouldnt be surprised if some matches were fixed

I realize bad decisions do happen. But FAR more often than not, fans claiming robbery weren't actually up close watching a match. TV and especially Sopcast is no way to judge a fight, especially if it's anywhere near close. Take for instance Malignaggi v Ngoudjo. All the judges had Malignaggi as did the "press judges", and all "professional" post fight writeups that I've read. A tough and close fight for Malignaggi, but not a robbery. Same with Floyd v DLH. Watching the fight on TV or from far away at the match it could of looked like DLH won the fight with his effective aggression, but in reality most of the shots were not landing flush, or were bouncing harmlessly off Mayweather's shoulders. The only judge who had it for DLH was something like a geriatric 78 years old. I'm not saying they don't happen, but not nearly as much as claimed by fans.

"I thought Ultimate Robot Fighting was real like Wreslting, but it turns out is fixed like Boxing" - Phillip J. Frye

You make some good points. Judging a fight is no walk in the park though. I watched Mayweather-Castillo 1, the first time I watched it I scored it for Floyd. I watched it again, scored it for Castillo. Judges don't get a second chance. I agree with you for the most part though. I understand that, everyone messes up sometimes, but i mean some judges consistantly have horrible scores and still get picked for big fights