Tweet
Very good article that adresses a real issue that needs to be delt with. I mean in th last couple of months we have seen some really bad decisions that not aonly take away from yhe athletes that get cheated out off a victory but also from the sport that I enjoy so much to watch. I mean Diaz/Maliggnaggi I, Funeka/Guzman and now this. Soemthing really needs to be done.
-
-
2009 was a pitiful year for boxing there was plenty of ****t he missed mentioning. Only thing good in boxing was Pac even at that...
Comment
-
Close fights, corruption and incompetence
'' It's not rocket science to score a fight.''
No. But sometimes the fight is so close, depending on what you score (effective punching, agressivity, ring generalship), you end up with wide score margins. I remember the Pacquiao-Marquez I scoring. Most people agree to say it was a close fight. One judge had it a draw, the other 115-110 for Pacman, and the third 115-110 for Marquez. I mean what the **** ? Ten points margin between the last 2 scorecards ? It's a clear example of tough scoring that MAY LOOK like corruption or incompetence. There are robberies no one can argue with. Holyfield-Lewis I is a good example. One of the idiotic judges scored the best round Lewis had in the fight in favor of Holy
. She was questionned about that by Lampley and Merchant. She said she scored the fight to the best of her ability. If she admits she has a judgment and ability that poor, she should just lose her job 
. Some other fights continue to spark discussions years later, like Leonard-Hagler.
The first Malignaggi-Diaz fight for example. I thought it was a pretty close fight. Malignaggi was getting tagged a lot, backpedalling. The second was not close at all, but I can't blame the scoring in the first fight (minus the one scorecard that had 2 rnds for the Magic man
).
Sometimes it's hard to know if we're witnessing corruption or just incompetence. I think there are more incompetent judges than corrupted judges. But I'm not in the business... Just a fan. What can we really do if the most part of the problem is incompetence ?Comment
-
Yea but there is a huge difference when someone scores almost every round for someone like Diaz in that first fight. or for Beibut the other night.'' It's not rocket science to score a fight.''
No. But sometimes the fight is so close, depending on what you score (effective punching, agressivity, ring generalship), you end up with wide score margins. I remember the Pacquiao-Marquez I scoring. Most people agree to say it was a close fight. One judge had it a draw, the other 115-110 for Pacman, and the third 115-110 for Marquez. I mean what the **** ? Ten points margin between the last 2 scorecards ? It's a clear example of tough scoring that MAY LOOK like corruption or incompetence. There are robberies no one can argue with. Holyfield-Lewis I is a good example. One of the idiotic judges scored the best round Lewis had in the fight in favor of Holy. She was questionned about that by Lampley and Merchant. She said she scored the fight to the best of her ability. If she admits she has a judgment and ability that poor, she should just lose her job . Some other fights continue to spark discussions years later, like Leonard-Hagler.
The first Malignaggi-Diaz fight for example. I thought it was a pretty close fight. Malignaggi was getting tagged a lot, backpedalling. The second was not close at all, but I can't blame the scoring in the first fight (minus the one scorecard that had 2 rnds for the Magic man).
Sometimes it's hard to know if we're witnessing corruption or just incompetence. I think there are more incompetent judges than corrupted judges. But I'm not in the business... Just a fan. What can we really do if the most part of the problem is incompetence ?Comment
-
they need to start posting judges face again on the screen before fights. they use to do that, now they stopped showing them. I feel they need to show their faces again so that when they give out a bad scorecard we can put a face on it. IMO it adds a deterrent to giving bad scores. If you give out a bad score that you know is bad, you might have second thoughts knowing the public knows your name & the face to go along with it.Comment
-
You can't honestly compare Diaz/Malignaggi to funeka/Guzman.Malignaggi didn't dominate or beat Diaz decisively during their first fight and without the wide scoring and had he not threw a tantrum and started crying then I doubt most others would have fallen for his bull****.
Any impartial viewer could tell you that Diaz/Malignaggi was a close fight....funeka/Guzman wasn't.
And yet Malignaggi didn't utter a word when he was given decisions over Ndou and Ngoudjo.
Malignaggi knew what he was doing and knew how irrelevant he was in the sport.He had just been involved in a close competitive fight and throwing a hissy fit live on air to the viewing of gullible boxing fans who believe any close fight is a robbery was obviously going to gain him support....especially with what he was saying in the lead up.Comment
Comment