The Sport of Boxing *Attention Haters

good thread, i agree that the fighter that lands more should be the winner as long as he leads in more total and power punches. if the fighter leads in only jabs, that means the fighter wasnt working enough and wasnt tryin to win the fight but trying to survive. This is what I was trying to get out, it all depends on the situation. Excellent post!

See, the thread is more interesting with conflict. In the internet, it's safe and fun to antagonize people. It's not ok to harass. I wouldn't antagonize strangers in real life but here I can say a lot of stupid stuff and get away with it. Bias could be good also. Sport has been a battlefield for equality, especially in boxing. Just seeing Jack Johnson, Floyd Patterson, and Ali as champions lifted an entire community of people. Just seeing barriers broken is a measurement of how we can came along in society. Even though they lived blow for blow with their favorite fighters, I'm pretty sure you wouldn't fault the older African Americans for being baised and have their favorite fighters represent their struggle for equality. I know what you mean about the mentality of today's fighters. Back in the day, fighters fought hard in each round. 1. exactly... 2. as long as he's not a judge. i would like for boxers to get back to that, but they are much more interested in "fast and eazy" like the rest of america

Without fans to watch boxing what are you left with? Boxing. your point is valid. but i believe the chemistry between the fans and boxing is out of wack. kind of like hip hop, with the lyrics and the beats. feel me? jaja

Without fans to watch boxing what are you left with? Who's up in the stands shouting and hollering? Any sport without fans is what? JAT :wave: Without fans boxers wouldn't get a paycheck.. That's very true.. The more fans you have, the bigger paycheck you get.

So you are saying the fans make boxing exciting, and not the boxers? brainiac debate? http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/4792/pinkyandthebrainpp4.jpg Without fans to watch boxing what are you left with? Who's up in the stands shouting and hollering? Any sport without fans is what? JAT :wave:

yeah you got three judges and most of the time 1 of them has a totally different score than the other two. it dont make sense It doesn't. I understand that you can have a different opinion depending on the angle you're viewing from, but when one judge is so way off from the others it really makes me wonder who the hell is paying them off! That's why I always tell the boxers I know to just do your best to KO your opponent so you don't have to rely on the judges to do the right thing.

I think you're absolutely correct on the fans supporting their favorite fighter(s). I'd say 99.9% of the posters here do that. Some less than others. Now envision how boring this website would be if everyone agreed on everything discussed or were just limited to brainiac debate. It would be Boring! JAT :wave: So you are saying the fans make boxing exciting, and not the boxers? brainiac debate? http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/4792/pinkyandthebrainpp4.jpg

That's what I mean by politics, because idk what fight that judge was watching, but it wasn't that one!! yeah you got three judges and most of the time 1 of them has a totally different score than the other two. it dont make sense

true, i thought the compubox was completely messed up for parts the collazo fight. @ el malo ya, that guy was obviously playing with his psp during the fight.. Yes I agree.. Fortunately my friend wasn't doing the numbers that night, because I called him freaking out, and he said, "it wasn't me I swear!" lol

that judge should be thrown off the grand canyon, there always seems to be a judge to be way off on the scorecards in most fights. That's what I mean by politics, because idk what fight that judge was watching, but it wasn't that one!!

As far as scoring according to the number of punches I do agree with that, but still that is according to opinion, and visibility. A friend of mine does the compubox numbers for ESPN and HBO, and he fully admits that he doesn't always get the numbers correct 100% of the time. It's impossible for one person to see every punch in every round. I think there's a lot of room for improvement, but we'll never be able to perfect it. true, i thought the compubox was completely messed up for parts the collazo fight. @ el malo ya, that guy was obviously playing with his psp during the fight..

Boxing needs nut huggers and biased fans to make the sport more exciting. "Nut hugging" is fine as long as it doesn't get physically violent between the fans. It is fun to debate the issues and antogize people. Besides, there is nothing wrong with expressing passion. You're not truly a fan(fanatic) without showing passion. The scoreboard idea is bad, just like "open scoring". We'll see more fighters quit on the stool if that happens. Besides, they have mechanical scoring in the Amatures/Olympics. We'll see more slap happy fighters not wanting to knock a man out if computerized scoring is established at the Pro-level, which will hurt boxing. lol. Boxing does not need neither "nut huggers" nor "biased fans". ppv boxing. maybe... I'm not saying having favorites fighter is wrong. The fan that lives and dies through their boxer is not a healthy fan. lol. You do see it in other sports. but not to the extreme that it is carried to in boxing. antagonizing is usually what brings the violence to the fans... it is fun with close friends and family.. i would not try it with strangers.. lol i see ur point about the score box. but do u see that even the mentality of today's fighters have drastically changed. You never see that guy going for the 12th round knockout in a fight he knows he has lost.

good thread, i agree that the fighter that lands more should be the winner as long as he leads in more total and power punches. if the fighter leads in only jabs, that means the fighter wasnt working enough and wasnt tryin to win the fight but trying to survive.

I couldn't agree with you more.. You also have to add politics into this. Yes the scoring is based on opinion, but also politics. If it's left to the score cards, more than likely it will go to the hometown favorite, or if it's (say for example on HBO) a network fighter they are much more likely to get it. ie: Berto/Collazo. I had it 115-112 Collazo, and there was a judge that had it 116-111 Berto. idk how anyone could of had Berto winning 9 rounds of that fight(& that's with the point deduction), and I like Berto! You're so right.. Something needs to change in order to change this sport.. ALSO one thing that I don't like about boxing that needs to be changed is that you can hold a belt, and not have to fight all the mandatories. As long as you have the money, you can buy your time, and dodge whoever you want! It's BS. that judge should be thrown off the grand canyon, there always seems to be a judge to be way off on the scorecards in most fights.

As far as scoring according to the number of punches I do agree with that, but still that is according to opinion, and visibility. A friend of mine does the compubox numbers for ESPN and HBO, and he fully admits that he doesn't always get the numbers correct 100% of the time. It's impossible for one person to see every punch in every round. I think there's a lot of room for improvement, but we'll never be able to perfect it.

The fan base of boxing seems to be quite poor and immature. Instead of enjoying the sport, people will worship a fighter. In turn they begin to view the sport in a biased way. I believe more rules need to be created, for the future success of the sport. Judges may need to be replaced with a more accurate technology (scoreboard?). Fighters to be more properly examined. At the end of the day, the stats don't lie. Fighters just trying to get them W's. If they lose, and have a "good" they still have that loss on their record. period. Judges are human, and make mistakes. Judges are all individuals. 3 individuals may perceive the same exact thing in three different ways. This leads to way too much controversy over every decision that is made in a close fight. In reality the person to land the most punches wins the fight. Why leave it to an opinion, when we have technology capable of telling us facts. All great champions get defeated, because they are human. The physical specimen that was Mike Tyson was destroyed. because of out of the ring choices and distractions. The great Muhammad Ali was defeated because he probably took a few too many head shots during his career. Roberto Duran loss to the sands of time. Love the competition. Respect the champions. Enjoy the show. Let's celebrate boxing! (= Eh? How the heck can a computer or a machine judge a boxing match? If we rely on "Newer" technology like you said, I'm afraid pro boxing will turn into a travesty just like olympic boxing..

Good thread. Scorin is always objective. if a rd ain't clearly for one guy, there's no system that could always get the judges to agree. And compubox is wrong sumtimes too. The #s matter, but they ain't always the decidin factor. I wish official judges would bite the bullet and score even rds more often. If you can't make a decision on a close rd, make it a tie. And yea, too many fanboys are quick to abandon their man or label him exposed/overrated simply cuz he lost. If it ain't that, it's all about makin excuses and refusin to concede he could actually be defeated by the better man legitimately. Boxing is the shit and it's too bad we ain't got more real fans to show some luv. :boxing:

You mean Margarito lost, right? Anyway, I just think it shouldn't be that simple...land more punches, win the fight. In some cases, yes. But not all the time. yes, and valid point i actually think that could work. but applying these improvements might cause problems... I'm sure any change would stir up the boxing community, but it may be better for the long run. @I watch boxing Not sur, model by the name of angelica

@Massage Queen I was just about to mention the Collazo fight. I believe many of Collazo's combination's were disregarded because of they were not "telling blows" as Contenders mentioned. I do agree that those types of hits should be counted more. However, in Williams - Margarito, many of Williams' rounds were given because of very weak combination's that barely grazed Margarito and he lost that fight pretty decisively as I recall I see where you're coming from...I had Collazo winning 114-113 by the way. You mean Margarito lost, right? While it's true that Williams' punches weren't as hard as Tony's, that fight was simply P-Will being A LOT busier than Marg in the early rounds...entire first half actually, plus the final round. Anyway, I just think it shouldn't be that simple...land more punches, win the fight. In some cases, yes. But not all the time.

That shouldn't be the only basis to win a fight. There's ring generalship, effective offense (telling blows, not just pitty pat), etc. I agree that changes can be made, but I don't think the scoring should be that cut and dry. @Massage Queen I was just about to mention the Collazo fight. I believe many of Collazo's combination's were disregarded because of they were not "telling blows" as Contenders mentioned. I do agree that those types of hits should be counted more. However, in Williams - Margarito, many of Williams' rounds were given because of very weak combination's that barely grazed Margarito and he lost that fight pretty decisively as I recall. Consistency needs to be maintained in Judging. 2 Human Judges and 1 Computer?