Solution for Better Scoring?

Pressure sensors? Tags on the belt line? WTF??? Why can't we just accept that it's OK for someone to see a fight differently from you? As is said before if you want decisions to fall into what the majority of people think (which is what it boils down to) change it to Xfactor style phone ins and you'll get what you want. My idea especially helps in a fight where the action is fast, the fight is even and solid punching could be the determining factor in a W. Again, looking for a catch for all things illegal isn't realistic, especially atm. Punch detection software akin to face recognition in Casinos would have to be developed just for boxing, BUT sensor tech could be implemented in months to a year if it were considered by the sport. And it's an aid to judging, not doing away with physical judges. There are just quirky things a computer wouldn't be able to interpret now. but we would finally see cool things like defense actually being rewarded with sensors being able to determine misses, and blocks in collision with the back of the gloves.

Pressure sensors? Tags on the belt line? WTF??? Why can't we just accept that it's OK for someone to see a fight differently from you? As is said before if you want decisions to fall into what the majority of people think (which is what it boils down to) change it to Xfactor style phone ins and you'll get what you want. We are in advanced society why we can't use these advanced technology for better scoring? The Mayweather family thought it was a highway robbery. 99.99% of the media, boxing writers, well known boxers thought Pac won. At the HBO poll 91% voted for Pac. and yet the floydiots and Pac haters here in NSB insisted Bradley won. Do you think these Pac haters they are better than the Mayweathers and these well known boxers when it comes to judging a fight? If you gave them a power to vote do you think they will vote for Pac who clearly won the fight? Of course no. They will still vote for Bradley who clearly outclassed by Pac for the sake of hating.

Judges should be locked away in a sound proof booth so they don't hear the crowd cheers or the bias commentators (sounds a little crazy but boxing judges and the corruption is getting SO BAD that maybe boxing needs to take DRASTIC MEASURES! fans cheering for flurries that are hitting nothing but air I am sure can influence the judges and the judges should remain anonymous up until FIGHT NIGHT IMO, even though shouldn't know if they are calling the fight until the last minute kinda like doing Jury Duty and you have to wait all day and you don't know if you will be an actual Juror or a Alternate...the same should be with these Judges but if your announcing the judges and and ref long before the fight...that is plenty of time to call them and offer BRIBERY! Lets be honest, that is exactly what is happening! Duane Ford kinda hinted a little bit at how the Judges Selection Process Works, seems like Promoters are influencing who is picked as the 3 Judges for their Promoted Fights, to me that is a HUGE PROBLEM and leaves room open for MAJOR CORRUPTION! Promoters should not even be apart of the Judges Selection Process! Who the athletic commission appoints to a fight...THAT IS WHO SHOULD BE THE JUDGES!

The current system isn't the problem, it's the endemic corruption and lack of accountability that allows these horrendous robberies to take place. What's the current penalty for a judge or referee who drops the ball? Nothing that I can see, maybe some token "retraining" or whatever, but nothing that seriously impacts their livelihood. There is no fear of any official reprimand because it doesn't exist. Why then should anyone fear breaking the rules? Boxing needs a uniform and relatively transparent governing body that calls into sharp account misdemeanors like this, and deals out strict punishments to those it finds guilty of misconduct/incompetence. As long as boxing operates under this clan system of competing promoters/organizations there will always be a place for the corrupt judge, whatever the system.

Solution for Better Scoring? Hire newly properly training younger judges, and all judges are regulated and rated like the Umps in the MLB. Done.

Pressure sensors? Tags on the belt line? WTF??? Why can't we just accept that it's OK for someone to see a fight differently from you? As is said before if you want decisions to fall into what the majority of people think (which is what it boils down to) change it to Xfactor style phone ins and you'll get what you want.

lol, punch scoring is just as subjective as round scoring. and open scoring has ruined every fight i've ever seen it used in.

No a computer isn't judging the fight, it would take two trained certified judges to agree on a shot. Anything is better than what we currently have, image if Pacquiao knew the judges had the fight almost even after 10 rounds, don't you think Pacquiao would of turned up the heat in the 11th and 12th round? Honestly, the robbery of Pacquiao is a blessing and a curse for the sport. At no point, should any boxer ease off, and by doing so, he only has himself to blame. I though Pacquiao won 8-4 after my second viewing. On my first viewing, I had it 9-3. But truth be told, alot of close rounds, and I gave them to Pac because of the cleaner blows, but I could see how someone else could look at things differently. Pac went in cruise control and lost. Its history repeating itself. After a closer analysis and introspection, I don't put this in the same category of say Whitaker/Chavez, Campillo/Cloud or Lara/Williams. This fits into the DLH/Trinidad category, where the first half was littered with alot of close rounds that you give based on preference, and the second half was DLH easing up a bit because he thought he had it in the bag. Served him right, and honestly serves Pac right. If you want to fix scoring, I think the categories in place are a sound fundamental system. They should just be weighted accordingly. They are Clean, punching (+4) Defense (+3) Ring Generalship (+2) Effective Aggression (+1) Now I put a numerical value in the order my own personal preference, and by it self, is not perfect, but in my honest belief, using a more rigid formula is a better attempt at deciding a winner on a round by round basis. If Pacquiao lands all the clean punches in a given round, then he would be awarded +4. Naturally, Effective aggression can go hand in hand, so Pacquiao could be up +5 in a round. If Bradley takes Defense and Ring Generalship, they both could be even at a +5/+5. For my own personal preference, I would give the round to the champ, because I always believe the benefit of doubt would go there. Anyways, I'd be giving a round to Pac. In the Bradley fight, there were many instances, especially in the second half, where Bradley won the last three categories, which would cumulatively outweigh Pac's clean punches. He was moving around, showing good guard, making Paquiao miss and throwing a flurry. Pac may land the 2 or 3 of the best punches, but it wasn't enough to outweigh Bradley's +6 in the other categories, so Bradley would win those rounds in my card. Now that is just using the latest fight as an example. Overall, the four criteria is sound fundamentals, they should be properly weighted in a more analytical format

Here is the better idea. We need to put cameras in every possible viewing angles in the ring put sensor to the belt of each boxing shorts to monitor low blows put pressure sensor to each boxing gloves a special boxing software computers 3 judges boxing commissioners Now all above tech stuffs should be connected wirelesly to the computers to analyze each given tasks. The pressure sensors in boxing gloves will record how strong the punch is upon landing to the target and send the data to the computers to score. The scoring system should be based on how strong the punch is. 1 point - for tickling punch 2 points - for moderate punch 3 points - for strong punch The cameras in all angles will verify the punch first. If the punch landed legally on the body or head then the computer will score it accordingly how strong it is. If the punch landed on arms or boxing gloves, the computer will just ignore it. If the punch landed illegally like below the belt, behind the head or a sucker punch. The computer will deduct a point to the offender according to how strong the punch is. After the round, the computer will calculate how many points for each fighter they gained and then do the subtractions. Whoever landed more win the round and should be given by 1 final point and 2 final points if he entirely dominated the round, 1 final point for each knockdown and 0 point for the loser. If the round is too close or draw, the computer will give a go signal to the 3 judges who will decide where they should give the round according to certain rules they must follow accordingly. They judges allowed to give points from 1-3 base of the following... clean effective punches ring generalship defense effective aggression etc.. Whoever gained more points win that round will receive 1 final point. Of course the fight can be end as usual either by his corner, ref, doctor, ko or tko, etc.. If the fight goes to decision, this is where the computer gave his score then add the 3 judges scores in close rounds. The boxing commissioners will carefully examine the facts then announce the winner.:boxing::boxing:

open scoring every round

Boxing is never going back to iron man matches. That's not even close to practical, else that would've been everyone's answer.

It has to be a knockout in the fight or else the fight is a draw. problem solved bitches! I like....the only way to sort out a clear winner lol

It has to be a knockout in the fight or else the fight is a draw. problem solved bitches!

I had an idea to bring in 9.5 and 8.5 rounds. Obviously if fights are actually fixed this won't help. A close round win gets 10-9.5 A clear round win gets 10-9 A dominant round with no kd gets 10-8.5 This will stop fighters trying to edge rounds and reward fighters for trying to dominate a round. Sometimes you get a fight where one fighter wins 5-6 clear rounds ad the other 5-6 are close, now if the judge likes the style of other fighter, he gets the win despite not winning a single clear round.

Knockout wins only.

More digitization. pressure based sensor tech in the wraps/gloves and a sensor at the belt line of the shorts to detect low punches. At the very least, it adds an instant replay like element to a live fight with more accurate punch stats. There's no infallible detection with illegal shots and all or an infallible judging system, but the combo of judging and good tech can really work to keep judges in line and be concerned with being caught appearing inept.

terrible idea.. almost as bad as the guy who thought the fans should vote online and be a 4th judge :rofl: pro boxing needs to stick with the old criteria for scoring fights, its gotten away from it enough as it is. if it starts giving out points punch for punch all we would get is volume punchers and the art of boxing would die. it doesnt show how damaging a punch is so there would be less punchers too. it would be like the ams which has damaged pro boxing enough by creating unproffessional styles. to take it directly to the pros would be terrible. it would do nothing to end corruption either, the ams are just as corrupt as the pros. if anything it would be easier to fix fights that way. open scoring takes all teh suspense out of boxing and doesnt really do anythign to stop corruption. what diffrence does it make if you watch the robbery round by round instead finding out at the end? again the ams is the perfect example, seen plenty of fighters get robbed with open scoring there.

All these kind of scoring there is loop hole that can be taken advantage easily and be cheated. The only solution is to let them fight to the last man standing or until someone quit or the fight stopped by his team. In this way nobody can cheat and those 70-80 year old judges can enjoy the last remaining days of their life here on Earth.

How about keeping one professional judge but have current professional boxers from a different weight division (never likely to meet in the ring which would remove proffessional bias etc) as the other judges. Plus maybe the boxers called in to judge should also be from a different trainer, manager, promoter etc that would also remove more bias and the possibility of corruption. Also, they could alternate sides of the ring every other round to see a different perspective of the fight as oppose to remaining static and only seeing from one angle for the duration if a fight were to go the distance. I honestly don`t know though what an effective solution would be and maybe we are all just grasping at straws to try and rationalise what we have seen happen recently with all of the bad decisions that have happened.

1. add a fourth judge that uses the same television feed the fans see to judge the fights. 2. There has to be accountability & reprimand for judges that turn in dubious scorecards. 3. No more 70 & 80 year old judges or referees. IN ANY SPORT. i been saying this forever.judges should have to watch on monitors.1 static angle is just not suffiecient.i would also like for judges to be randomly selected or not revealed until night of the fight