It would be interesting to have 5 judges as opposed to 3. I mean we can avoid draws and potential robberies by having 2 more opinions on the fights. I am sure there would be some downsides as well.
With three judges, a majority decision need 2 votes. With five judges, a majority would need 3. It's not exactly fool proof, but I think it would be better than our current system. It will probably never happen, but I would like hear what everyone thinks.
No make it 13 rounds...so it'd difficult for draws...
And just hire better judges...
13 rounds would be great, but living in a ridiculously superstitious (outdated) society, 13 still carries a negative stigma. A lot of modern buildings still don't have a thirteenth floor.
Boxing definitely better judges.
How would 5 judges avoid draws?
3 is fine bringing 2 more judges would just cause more confusion... If you guys think 3 is bad why add 2 more? Then everybody would start crying robbery when all 5 judges have the same score in a close fight.We don't need anymore of that.
Good points, but I think the problem with having 3 judges is it that there are only 3 judges. Having 2 more judges would give a more balanced (at least better than now) judgment. We have the camera technology to watch fights in many more angles than we used to. If bringing more judges adds even more confusion, than why not have just one or two (plus referee). Because fights need to be judge on different angles.
If all 5 judges scored the same in a close fight, then that only validates the decision more. You're right in blatant robberies 5x being worse than 3x. But then again fighters will screwed either way, I just think will be less robberies.
How would 5 judges avoid draws?
3 is fine bringing 2 more judges would just cause more confusion... If you guys think 3 is bad why add 2 more? Then everybody would start crying robbery when all 5 judges have the same score in a close fight.We don't need anymore of that.