Open Scoring

[salitap4p#1]

As a fan I don't like it but if I was in the ring I think I'd prefer it.

I'd rather know I'm being shafted on the cards and realise I have to ko my opponent than find out after the bell I've been shafted when I can no longer ko him.

It's depressing that boxing has come to wanting the better of two evils but that's how it is.

[Ringlife]

I don't like it at all. I like the score cards to be read after the fight with all the suspense and drama.

[DosRounds]

The open scoring happened when Vitali fought Peter and since Peter was behind on the 8th round he decided to retire on his stool. He took a beating though. With open scoring I reckon that'll happen more

[MrFactor]

Keep in mind, he took a hellacious beating, open scoring or not. He may have retired anyway.

[KickAzz]

I have no problem with open scoring. A boxer should know what to do when they are behind. open scoring will help boxers become more well-rounded.

[SlySlickSmooth]

Down with open scoring!! Ruins the suspense and drama.

[Motofan]

Open scoring is, and always has been total ****. It ruins fights every ****ing time it is used. Always has.

[White_Knight]

As someone else mentioned, it ruins the suspense. The Trout-Alvarez fight is a perfect example. The fight lost excitement after round 4 and lost even more after round 8. You said our problem is more with the scoring than with devulging the scores. Sadly, boxing is plagued by bad scoring, so it has the potential to ruin every 3rd or 4th fight. Also, if a fighter doesn't know he is being robbed he will continue to fight his heart out. When the scorecard are read after the fight most will recognise it as a robbery. If a fighter knows he is being robbed, however, he may simply not try, quit, or fight ******ly trying to get the knock out. In doing so he will lose the remaining rounds, thereby making the fight closer than it otherwise would have been. The fight won't be thought of as a robbery and the injustice done to the fighter will be overlooked.

If you are going to have open scoring, reveal the scores once after, say, round 5, and leave it at that, but I think it's better that it's done away with altogether.

[DLT]

I hate anything that changes the way a guy fights. Thats on his know how and his trainers to figure out.


What if we have the same Rigo-Donaire fight with open scoring but after 8 rounds the cards read that Donaire is winning by such a margin that Rigo needs a KO to win or atleast a knock down. He then changes up and starts pressing so hard that Donaire catches him and knocks him out.

Everyone would feel totally different now about that fight. There would be people arguing that Nonito is the superior fighter and it was just a matter of time before he caught him. They will say that who is to say that Rigo wouldve lasted? No one knows.

However, now we do know that Rigo did last and clearly beat Donaire but if the scores were open and showed Donaire winning then it couldve drasictaclly change that fight. I dont think that is right. They should never be open. Never

[DLT]

I have no problem with open scoring. A boxer should know what to do when they are behind. open scoring will help boxers become more well-rounded.

what if they shouldnt be behind? What if they should be winning or it should be close but some idiot/crooked judge has him losing by a ton. Now he changes the way he's fighting and gets KTFO