The State Of Judging In Boxing

[Technical_Skill]

This is something that is annoying me more and more often. Lazy Judges and judges who must be on the take, how many more bad decisions are we gonna see in major fights before someone does something? Its almost like bad judging is accepted in boxing but these decisions are hindering fighters careers, these guys are already putting their life on the line in the ring, next minute they gotta go up against some idiot judge who has no business scoring fights.

The Martinez-Cintron fight was the last straw, those two judges who had it 113-113 should never be allowed to judge again, then there was the judge that had Andre Berto easily beating Collzao, that was a very close fight, but this guy had Berto 3 or so rounds up.

Judges need to stop being lazy and score rounds for Clean and effective punching, I dont wanna see rounds go to a guy who isnt landing punches but is moving forward, that doesnt warrant winning the round imo, I dont wanna see rounds go to fighters that hit gloves and dont land clean shots.

If the fight is close and the judges scoring reflects that, thats fine by me, but when a judge scoring is very suspect, some sort of action has to be taken so these morons cant ruin more careers.

[Haglerwins]

Decisions need to be subject to overturns via 3rd party fight review committee. This needs to be a regular thing in boxing. Unless this happens, I don't think a damn thing is gonna change.

[Technical_Skill]

Decisions need to be subject to overturns via 3rd party fight review committee. This needs to be a regular thing in boxing. Unless this happens, I don't think a damn thing is gonna change.

You know wat, I did think of this, but it would have to be only for crazy ass decisions, either every mother****er would be challenging the result.

****s sake, Cintron was challenging the 113-113 after the fight, thinking he'd actually won, disgraceful, Martinez, clearly won, cut him, knocked him down, and cintron was lucky not to get counted out.

[Guest]

How do you feel about even rounds, Technical?

Or should it be 10 point must?

In the old days of 15 rounders they seemed to have more even rounds.

[Haglerwins]

You know wat, I did think of this, but it would have to be only for crazy ass decisions, either every mother****er would be challenging the result.

****s sake, Cintron was challenging the 113-113 after the fight, thinking he'd actually won, disgraceful, Martinez, clearly won, cut him, knocked him down, and cintron was lucky not to get counted out.

I'm more interested in something like this being implemented to clean up after the refs more than the Judges, because judging is so subjective in general. Point deductions need to be called or taken off, KDs reviewed, rabbit punching, bad stoppages, everything. I think you'd get some good results looking in those directions instead of focusing soley on the Judges cards.

[Feint]

I have to defend judges in that what a lot of people don’t realize is television viewers get a much better view of the action than even the judges do. I think a better solution would be to add two more judges for every fight. Five sets of eyes are going to get a better (and fairer) result than just three.

[Technical_Skill]

How do you feel about even rounds, Technical?

Or should it be 10 point must?

In the old days of 15 rounders they seemed to have more even rounds.

I score even rounds. If two guys both land the roughly the same amount of clean punches and they seem to be equal in effectiveness, i'll be inclined to go for the 10-10 round. Thats obviously a rarity in boxing, but I also tend to score 10-10 rounds when you get two fighters not landing anything clean or effective, that can happen early on in fights where the opponents are working each other out. Im not gonna give a round to a boxer just because he is moving forward.

[Haglerwins]

I have to defend judges in that what a lot of people don’t realize is television viewers get a much better view of the action than even the judges do. I think a better solution would be to add two more judges for every fight. Five sets of eyes are going to get a better (and fairer) result than just three.

This is why there needs to be a review committee. They can look at the tape and see if they can see some obvious flaws for one (i.e. refs not accounting fouls or correctly calling actions) in the scoring.

I'm shocked that we don't at least have this. So many fights would've been voided or the correct result awarded on that alone already, without going into the gray realm of judging a judge.

[Haglerwins]

One example I can think of right away other than Cintron-Martinez was some old Calzaghe fight somebody posted on here last week. The ****ing ref stands by and lets Joe rabbit punch and you can easily argue all 3 KDs his opponent suffers were initiated from the allowance of fouling. Then at the end, you could also argue the fight may have been stopped prematurely.

If I was on a review committee, there's no way a fight like that doesn't get my vote to be voided and a rematch would be scheduled.

I'd lay into that ref hard for not doing his job.

[OnePunch]

alot of judges seem to have come up from the amateurs, and have brought their scoring habits with them. More often than not these days all you have to do to win a round is throw more punches than your opponent, regardless of whether or not they are actually landing. So many judges only look at workrate, and disregard the "effective" part of "effective aggression". And they dont give the proper credit for body punches either.

Example:

Fighter A throws 80 pit-pat punches, and lands 20 (25%)

Fighter B throws 45 punches, and lands 18, but lands the much better shots (40%)

Most of today's judges will give that round to fighter A