If you could change anything about boxing

Your misreading me, i'm not calling for their to be defense or for it to be a blood bath. My point is that you already judge if a fighter is connecting and landing punches (clean punching). To judge based on defense you are double rewarding the same action. If fighter a uses head movement to prevent fighter b from not hitting him, then fighter a is preventing fighter b from scoring points and winning the round. Fighter A's defense is preventin fighter B from winning the round, so defense is already being accounted for in the scoring. To count it again as a criteria is at the least redundant. Its akin to me giving points to a basketball team every time they make the opponent miss. You dont need to do that because their defense is already being rewarded by preventing the opponent from scoring. Now, one could argue that a fighter could then just be a runner and avoid conflict and prevent his opponent from landing. But scoring defense doesnt change that- rhe other criteria does though You know what could end scoring debates ? A scoring system that goes beyond knockdowns :lol1: What exactly is a 10-9/10-8, etc rd :dunno: MLB, a grand slam = 4. 3 runners on base followed by a HR. No extra points for moon shots. NFL 7/8 pts equal a touchdown followed by a pt after kick or successful 2 pt attempt No extra points for Hail Mary's Boxing, a guy wins the rds by maybe landing more punches. But how much is a punch worth ? And how much is slipping said punch worth ?

There is a skill to making your opp look desperate, almost amateurish in his attempt to land punches. As much as us fight fans would love blood baths, not all fighters are built for that face first fist eating. That style also doesn't make for a prosperous career in the long term. Medical issues in retirement. Fighting smarter, not harder, is the sweet science. What separates a "runner" from a tactician is taking advantage of ineffective aggression. AKA counterpunching. Of the 2, I'd much rather reward a tactician than a swing and a miss type guy and someone should be rewarded. Your misreading me, i'm not calling for there to be defense or for it to be a blood bath. My point is that you already judge if a fighter is connecting and landing punches (clean punching). To judge based on defense you are double rewarding the same action. If fighter a uses head movement to prevent fighter b from not hitting him, then fighter a is preventing fighter b from scoring points and winning the round. Fighter A's defense is preventin fighter B from winning the round, so defense is already being accounted for in the scoring. To count it again as a criteria is at the least redundant. Its akin to me giving points to a basketball team every time they make the opponent miss. You dont need to do that because their defense is already being rewarded by preventing the opponent from scoring. Now, one could argue that a fighter could then just be a runner and avoid conflict and prevent his opponent from landing. But scoring defense doesnt change that- rhe other criteria does though

principal o'shag-hennessy vs a-a-ron

Haha, along those lines I think landing punches should matter more than, making your opponent not land punches. In other words, defense should not be a scored criteria. Defense is how you prevent your opponent from scoring, by articulating it as a scoring metric you end up counting it twice. There is a skill to making your opp look desperate, almost amateurish in his attempt to land punches. As much as us fight fans would love blood baths, not all fighters are built for that face first fist eating. That style also doesn't make for a prosperous career in the long term. Medical issues in retirement. Fighting smarter, not harder, is the sweet science. What separates a "runner" from a tactician is taking advantage of ineffective aggression. AKA counterpunching. Of the 2, I'd much rather reward a tactician than a swing and a miss type guy and someone should be rewarded.

1. Although the 4 organisations are a joke they could stay since they have been around a while just need changing and realistically it cannot go to 1 belt, people love claiming should be 1 belt when even in their grandfathers age there was more than 1 belt. Dempsey held the NYSAC, NBA and Ring title in 1923. 103 years ago. They need to work together to improve their rankings system. There should be 1 main body like a boxing ombudsman who has to approve the 4 organisations decisions. We all ready know frauds like Sulaiman will do what they want and fighters they favour 2. The 4 organisations need to scrap ALL secondary titles including interims. Start ranking each others champions. 3. Compubox become non existent. Fans love using it as some kind of know it all to prove who won a fight when it is a guy hitting some buttons when they think a punch should count. 4. Commentary influence viewers. Neutral commentators not signed to a network. Those signed to a network will tend to speak favourably about the fighters who are signed to the promotional outfit who are signed to the same network. 5. Champions MUST defend their title at least twice a year. Only exemptions are injuries where real proof is provided. 'Mental health' claim doesn't count, e.g Charlo getting to keep his belt not fighting 2 years with no physical injuries should have been stripped. 6. Any top 15 should also fight a minimum 2 fights per year or be dropped from the rankings 7. Organisations work together for less mandatories if a fighter holds multiple belts. E.g Usyk has WBA WBC IBF. Their no.1 ranked fighters face off to decide who will be mandatory. If they keep interims than interims ordered to fight each other to decide the mandatory. 8. Unifications and Undisputed always be approved and mandatories not come in the way. Some people think Unifications or Undisputed trump mandatories, this isn't always the case, the fighters still need to ask the relevant organsations for approval and they can still order a mandatory. It should be an automatic trumps mandatories 9. Judges wear noise cancelling headphones so they cannot hear anyone elses opinion near by and so they cannnot be influenced by the crowd noise. I think wbc tried this but should be a thing for all judges across any pro fight whatever level. 10. Excessive clinching or running and barely any punches thrown, potential point taken 11. Less time wasting before fights by the networks or promoters. Pundits not talking too long and scrap the national anthems they are not needed 12. 5 judges 13. Draws. Mandatory rematch. But change implement to make a draw even more rare in the first place 14. Rehydration limit like IBF. I know people do not agree with rehydration clauses, but if it's an issue for the fighter then they're a weight bully, move up. 15. A team can go to a video referee if they feel a knockdown should have been given. E.g where a fighters glove has touched the canvas but a ref did not give the knockdown 16. Mandatory 365 testing. Every top 20 at least signed up for it. I don't know who is signed up to vada 365 i do not think many have. I know Canelo and Haney have at some point. Testing should not only be for camp.

landing punches would count more than trying to land punches and missing Haha, along those lines I think landing punches should matter more than, making your opponent not land punches. In other words, defense should not be a scored criteria. Defense is how you prevent your opponent from scoring, by articulating it as a scoring metric you end up counting it twice.

Weight in, in the dressing room, just before the fight.

Better views for the judges They should have the best seats in the house.

Boxing judging is a mess and everyone knows it. One bad scorecard can ruin a whole night and any bet tied to it. I’m in India and that’s why I lean toward formats without human bias. aviator bet365 explains the Aviator game on Bet365 India, where there are no judges, just a multiplier and your decision to cash out. Sometimes simplicity is exactly what broken sports need.

what would it be? I'd like to change a number of things, but first and most importantly get rid of all the alphabet titles and have just one governing body and one title. yep that is favourite without a doubt i think nearly everybody would like this to happen at the very least i would like to have Rival Champions ranked as a mandatory for other rival Champions

the fact that judges give the fight to the fighter that trows the most punches, instead of the fighter thatn lands the most.

what would it be? I'd like to change a number of things, but first and most importantly get rid of all the alphabet titles and have just one governing body and one title. this and get rid of some divisions.

I actually dont mind the ABC soup from a fighters perspective as it gives many more fighters a chance to fight for WT , , but I would like to see all organisations controlled by an overseer whos sole aim is to get a unified champion which means 1) If you win a WT the other two champions become your mandatory , you must defend first against one of them , highest bidder gets to decide who it is , if you defend successfully you now have two titles and you may have a fight of your choice from no lower than than top 4 of the 2 bodys you represent as champion , if you win that you must fight the remaining WT holder and he is your mandatory , if you win you are the unified Champ and you can fight any of the top 2 ranked fighters from any body ,,,, and around we go . 2) All fighters ranked above 50 must fight somebody ranked higher than themselves all the way to the top and champ , you can never fight somebody ranked lower than yourself unless you are Champ . 3) All unification fights to return to 15 Rounds , unification should be special and a battle of the very best who got there tested under fire , this dream system guarantees the best fighters fight the best , every fighter gets a go if they are good enough because the rankings really mean you earned it . 4) Trial by camera , if a pt is taken and the camera proves it too be wrong like Hatton Floyd then the pt is over ruled and given back . 5) No drawn fights , you go another round . number 2 is impossible, if a boxer is fighting a opponent ranked higher, the opponent is breaking the rule by fighting a lower ranked boxer

well the ratings skeme is all fucked up. floyd's fighting everyone but his weight class. de la hoya is fighting hand picked forbes. so basically the fighters that have made their way threw the rankings can't get a shot. and that's bullshit.

Revert back to the original 8 weight classes. But keep cruiserweight though.

I actually dont mind the ABC soup from a fighters perspective as it gives many more fighters a chance to fight for WT , , but I would like to see all organisations controlled by an overseer whos sole aim is to get a unified champion which means 1) If you win a WT the other two champions become your mandatory , you must defend first against one of them , highest bidder gets to decide who it is , if you defend successfully you now have two titles and you may have a fight of your choice from no lower than than top 4 of the 2 bodys you represent as champion , if you win that you must fight the remaining WT holder and he is your mandatory , if you win you are the unified Champ and you can fight any of the top 2 ranked fighters from any body ,,,, and around we go . 2) All fighters ranked above 50 must fight somebody ranked higher than themselves all the way to the top and champ , you can never fight somebody ranked lower than yourself unless you are Champ . 3) All unification fights to return to 15 Rounds , unification should be special and a battle of the very best who got there tested under fire , this dream system guarantees the best fighters fight the best , every fighter gets a go if they are good enough because the rankings really mean you earned it . 4) Trial by camera , if a pt is taken and the camera proves it too be wrong like Hatton Floyd then the pt is over ruled and given back . 5) No drawn fights , you go another round . Nice one, some great suggestions man.

what would it be? I'd like to change a number of things, but first and most importantly get rid of all the alphabet titles and have just one governing body and one title. Agreed 100%. That is the single most important change boxing could make. If that single governing body then introduced a transparent, mandatory ranking and defences system, that would be perfect. Now all we need is Bill Gates to become a fan and buy total control... ________ VAPIR ONE VAPORIZER

landing punches would count more than trying to land punches and missing

I would pick all the fights :lol1: Yeh the same really, the titles are fucked up and i think running away should be considered as cheating as clinching is.