Ways they can change the judging of fights?

I think the scoring system Itself needs to be changed, I think a fight should be judged on criteria, for example each round could be judged on the following... offense- out of ten defense- out of ten ring generalship- out of ten punches landed-out of ten knockdowns- each knockdown worth 5 points they could have a judge concentrating on just one area, this way they would only need one more judge and it would make fights more exciting as a fighter would not win if all they did was potshot and run, it would also make a judges job a HELL of lot easier. I also think instant replay needs to be used on major fights for fouls/knockdowns (PPV ect)

Every other sport in the world uses instant replay. Is is not very hard to have a video ref to review replays in between rounds. That way you can rule whether a knockdown was a slip or a cut caused by a headbutt or punch. Nor in boxing or in any other sport can you score a fight/game using instant replay. You can use it for a play, you can use it to decide knockdowns headbutts but it will be damn near impossible to use it to score a round, like it will be damn near impossible to use to ref a quarter or an inning.

I have rasied this issue before in Global Forum and no one even came up with a suggestion. As a stats geek, it amazes me how people always cry corruption and bias when the system is so limited as it currently stands. With rounds being scored typically 10-10 10-9 or 10-8. Going to the cards will always be a lottery. Two simple suggestions I have are, 5 judges and then retract the two cards which are most in favour of each fighter and use the three remaining. An additional point for who they think won the fight overall, current scoring doesnt allow for peaks at end of a round and start of the next etc.

but with open scoring, even if a judge is way off, its not like they can just change his scorecard, right? that's true, even with the open scoring what would they do? fire him from ringside? i agree with this. whether they're reading your score at certain points of the fight or not until after...your name is still attached to the score and announced to the crowd.

but with open scoring, even if a judge is way off, its not like they can just change his scorecard, right?

have them be able to watch the tv angles, watch a big screen instead of being obstructed by the ref and bad angles, make them accountable for their scoring, when scores are so skewed in such a way, an explanation needs to in order, then go from there........

Every other sport in the world uses instant replay. Is is not very hard to have a video ref to review replays in between rounds. That way you can rule whether a knockdown was a slip or a cut caused by a headbutt or punch.

they should use the cards of 5 "judges". have 3 guys score the fight like we do now, and then pick 2 press row scorecards at random after the fight is over...but not a hometown paper. another idea i had, also with 5 judges, have 1 guy score the fight like we currently do. then have 4 judges who solely focus on 1 of the criterias for scoring fights. like one judge that only watches for the cleaner punches, one for ring generalship, etc. just trying to think outside of the box a little bit haha See people think it's easy to judge a fight. When you're watching it on TV you have the best angle out everybody in the arena. In between rounds you can watch the replays on slow mo over and over, judges don't have this to help them. If the action is on one side of the ring. The judge that's on that side of the ring has the best view/angle of the action. However, the judge that's on the other side of the ring doesn't have the best view/angle of the action. This is also a reason why you can get crazy scores IMO. Not everything is corruption. But, a lot of it is. That's why I think not only have 4 judges but the ref since he is right there in the ring would have the best view/angle of the action. 5 judges. 1 judge in each side of the ring plus the ref being the 5th judge. But, I do like the random press row scoring. That's a great idea I think. that should be looked at it as well. Or maybe pick the judges like they do for jury duty. Have a group of judges at the weigh-in or press conference or whatever. Have the promoters/managers/trainers/commission etc etc sit down interview the judges. eliminate the ones that they don't think will work out. Have them judge taped fights right then and there and have them explain their scoring on a round by round basis of they taped fights they see. I don't know but they have to do something.

they should use the cards of 5 "judges". have 3 guys score the fight like we do now, and then pick 2 press row scorecards at random after the fight is over...but not a hometown paper. another idea i had, also with 5 judges, have 1 guy score the fight like we currently do. then have 4 judges who solely focus on 1 of the criterias for scoring fights. like one judge that only watches for the cleaner punches, one for ring generalship, etc. just trying to think outside of the box a little bit haha

Some people think open scoring is bad for the fighters, but I actually see it as major pressure to the judges to score a fight properly. Their ridiculous scores will be announced several times through the fight. The problem is that they won't care, if they want to make a robbery they're going to do it even with open cards.

Some people think open scoring is bad for the fighters, but I actually see it as major pressure to the judges to score a fight properly. Their ridiculous scores will be announced several times through the fight.

They should apply the OPEN SCORING system that the WBC implemented and is using all over the world except in the USA. I agree with this. I hate how the judges miss judge fights. Happens too much. At least with Open scoring they can't hide.

They should apply the OPEN SCORING system that the WBC implemented and is using all over the world except in the USA.