I really don't like open scoring.

[Scott9945]

Closed scoring is something that makes boxing special. The suspense while waiting for the decision in a close fight like Pacquiao-JMM is an important part of the event. Open scoring will have people walking (and tuning) out early like they do in 10-0 baseball games.

[Ryn0]

It's terrible, it would demoralise a corner and a fight to the point of quiting, imagine if they used it on fights that were really close it would take the suspense away.

[Kris Silver]

it sounds like a good idea but when practiced it's horrible. Anyone remember Bell/Mommerck II? That was on pace to be FIGHT OF THE YEAR but the open scoring KILLED IT! Once Mormeck learned he was winning the fight he just ran around the ring the remaining rounds.

I'm totally against it.


I think there should be other things, like 10 judges, and there needs to be higher criteria in order to become a judge, proper training on how to score a round so that judges are on the same page, etc. etc. etc.

I agree with the 2nd part of what your saying. I do however think open scoring can be a good thing, and should occur more. It's not so important whether it takes away from the suspense. Boxing is a sport, how many sports are there were those involved or even watching really, can't really tell whose winning? Very very few, and of the ones it's possible it's due to it being very hard for it to be otherwise, with boxing that's not the case.

When a boxer can transparently see how well they are doing in the judges eyes, both can adapt fairly as they wish. That would stop a lot of robberies, dubious scoring, and make for much more interesting fights.

If it's known it's close, then it's still exciting at the end. If it's known it's not, it's often as exciting as the fighters and those watching often realise (later because of lederman card and commentators) one guy needs a KO, so little difference. The speculation is often round about right.

If a boxer is way behind on all cards, and doesn't think he can get a KO, why should he carry on getting a beating when he could make an informed decision and stop getting a beating? Just because it might entertain ppl a little more, sorry go watch some more brutal fighting, but boxings a sport of professional athletes.

[Sttuddahboy619]

Don't like it at all!!!

[Xyei]

I dont like the open scoring....I remember they used it for Cotto/Urkal....Urkal's trainers were so pissed they threw in the towel.

I don't like it either. I remember the Urkal fight too. **** stoppage. Urkal could easily have finished the fight.

[KESSLER]

I hate open scoring, it's ****ing gay.

[Feint]

Boxing is a great sport and only needs a little bit of tweaking in order to improve it but open scoring is not one of the things that needs to be done.

First of all, it is not a valid method for improving the sport because it does not do what it is supposed to. Some say it will keep officials honest. This idea of corruption running wild among boxing officials is ludicrous. Can I say that every single boxing official is honest? Of course not, just like I can’t say every banker, plumber, or teacher in the world is honest. But the vast majority is trying to do their job in a truthful manner and want to render a fair decision in each match.

As well, if you think it will help officials who are inept then you are mistaken. Sure, some officials are better at their jobs than others but open scoring isn’t going to change anything. Officials are going to score a fight based on how they see each round. Knowing how other officials scored previous rounds will not have any barring on how any individual judge scores the next round. *

Then you have the argument that it is better for the boxers and fans. The vast majority of the time this too is inaccurate. For the most part boxers pretty much know whether they are likely behind on the scorecards or up. This idea that knowing the score will improve the performance of a boxer who is behind is unlikely as boxers pretty much know where they stand late in a fight anyway. Heck, as previously mentioned some corners have even quit when they realized they were behind. And as far as the boxer who is ahead it is much more likely that he will simply try to protect a lead instead of continuing to win rounds. So in the few cases it would help create excitement it is much more likely that it would actually take away from it.

Finally also as previously mentioned part of the excitement of boxing is the intrigue at the end of a close match. Fans would lose this if open scoring took over.

To sum up, it won’t change what officials do and most of the time it will take away excitement from a match. Thus, I say it’s a bad idea.


* If people are worried about how a fight is scored a better solution would be to add two more judges.

[TintaBoricua]

Like I said they should only tell them the scores before the 12th Round.

LOL

Trainer: "Okay, this is the last round! We're winning the fight! Forget about knocking him out and just cruise, all right?"

Trainer #2: "Uhh, sir...we're down by 5 points..."

Trainer: "......Forget coasting! Knock his ***** ass out!"

XD

[Mike Tyson77]

I dont like it.

[Silencers]

I hate open scoring, takes all the suspense and drama away from the fight.