Should the Ref be that 'extra' judge ? Why not ?

[SonOfCuba]

There have been a lot request for more judges in order to avoid robberies and have more accurate scoring.

What about making the Ref one of the judges ? He is the guys closest to the action, sees when guys are really in trouble, knows which punches really land, and has an overall better feeling for who has won the fight.

I think making the ref an official judge and having him turn in a scorecard in between every round would be a good idea.

[Brother Jay]

Absolutely not.

The ref already has a difficult job to do. Doubling his duty as a judge would make it an impossible task.

You can't control the action and keep an accurate mental scorecard in your head.

Also, every time the ref warned a fighter it could impact the mental impression he has of a fighter.

Think about it: Excessive hugging? The ref might get pissed for having to repeatedly warn the fighter and score the round for his opponent. So despite no point being officially deducted, the scoring for that round could be swayed simply because the ref didn't like the fighter's behavior.

Let's not pretend that emotions don't play a role in scoring and even calling a fight.

If it didn't, there would be no such thing as pactards.

[Doctor_Tenma]

That kind of multitasking would be impossible.

[FeFist]

No the person scoring the fight shouldn't be directly involved with the fighters. Also look at things this way the Peterson fight where the Judge deducted points, suppose he then scored the fight in Peterson's favor (knockdowns taken into account) **** would hit the fan.

[MRBOOMER]

I think he should be 1 of the 3 is score card will always be correct unless he's been paid off only people closer to the action are the fighters lol

[Redd Foxx]

No way in hell. Talk about an opportunity for corruption. That would be like allowing a cop to write a prison sentence. There need to be checks and balances, boxing is already suffering in this area.

[M0NZ0N]

They used to do this, but not anymore. Just peruse boxrec of any old-time fighter and you'll see that the ref was also the 3rd judge.

Ask any referee out there now and they'll all say the same thing ... their #1 job is fighter safety. By asking them to also judge the round, would further increase the risk of someone getting hurt. In my opinion, it's not a wise trade-off.

[Pez]

only if the ref is bayless.

[edgarg]

For many years the referee was the sole judge. Then sometime in the 40s or 50s
(I think) they added 2 judges to make a more equitable decision possible, and then, sometime, I believe in the 1980s there steady increase in ring deaths decided the WBC to announce that they wanted the ref to solely concentrate on the fight and watch the health of the fighters. So they added a judge to make 3 judges and 1 referee each with his own job to concentrate on. All the other title organisations followed suit.

In England the referee is still the sole decider as to who is the winner.

Correct me if I'm wrong, my memory could be at fault.....a little.

[fate91185]

Yes, and they use to do it way back when, but im biased because i believe that all championship fights should still be 15 rounds (Just love the Old school format and feel to a championship fight), 12 rounds is not enough, and its an even amount of rounds which just doesn't seem right, at least 13 . And for those who say I am bugging out, we would not have got some memorable fights if the 12 rd format had always been in effect. For example and just to name one, Ray Leonard vs Thomas Hearns 1, if it would have ended in 12 Thomas would have got a decision, and where would have Leonard went from there? More examples can be brought up but i believe that is pertinent enough.