Solution for Better Scoring?

[#1Assassin]

terrible idea.. almost as bad as the guy who thought the fans should vote online and be a 4th judge

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.

[Haglerwins]

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.

[Curtiz]

Knockout wins only.

[Furn]

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.

[Shabba Rank$]

It has to be a knockout in the fight or else the fight is a draw.

problem solved bitches!

[Kunni Phunt]

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

[Haglerwins]

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

[kristin kreuk]

open scoring every round

[whirlwind]

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.

[JmH Reborn]

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