Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fixing Boxing Scoring Once and For All

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by Rockin' View Post
    Where do you file a formal petition complaint about the idiocy of this thread at?
    If you really read the whole post which is a bit too long for you I suppose, before judging anything and sounding idiotic yourself, the post stated that you can file the formal petition complaint on the commission of boxing. Yes, that would be the NSAC if we based that on today's timeline.

    In effect, everything in the current boxing system is still intact, the proposal didn't change anything on the whole system at all, it just added or should we say upgraded the current system by putting another layer of protection/security so that the sport in general could be more safer from human fallibility, and to dissuade cheaters from even attempting anything hanky-panky at all. Of course, if the commission is hell-bent on cheating, then, cheat they will, but then, at the expense of appearing to be a very obvious cheater to the public.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by ButtScratcher^^ View Post
      If you really read the whole post which is a bit too long for you I suppose, before judging anything and sounding idiotic yourself, the post stated that you can file the formal petition complaint on the commission of boxing. Yes, that would be the NSAC if we based that on today's timeline.

      In effect, everything in the current boxing system is still intact, the proposal didn't change anything on the whole system at all, it just added or should we say upgraded the current system by putting another layer of protection/security so that the sport in general could be more safer from human fallibility, and to dissuade cheaters from even attempting anything hanky-panky at all. Of course, if the commission is hell-bent on cheating, then, cheat they will, but then, at the expense of appearing to be a very obvious cheater to the public.
      This is a waste of time.

      And the ABC is already working on getting only the right calls made, and have been for some time now. And they have been doing good work.

      Go 'fix' some other sport.......

      Comment


      • #23
        Judges don't see compubox scores while judging the fight.

        Comment


        • #24
          I stopped reading at "pacquiao had indeed won"

          You just can't build on a weak foundation, your entire structure crumbles.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Rockin' View Post
            This is a waste of time.

            And the ABC is already working on getting only the right calls made, and have been for some time now. And they have been doing good work.

            Go 'fix' some other sport.......
            It is not a waste of time, the only waste of time is you, whining and moaning here in the forums without something to contribute about for the improvement of the sport.

            The proposal, is the only way to get accurate calls. You can never get accurate calls by just using your eyes in LIVE combat because judges or we an audience can only see what's in front of him and the other angle which is begging to be seen can never be seen clearly by the naked eye. In replay everything is seen, --every angle is exposed, thus, every punch is seen connected or not.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Isaac Clarke View Post
              Judges don't see compubox scores while judging the fight.
              Yes the current rule is judges don't score via compubox, but the petition decision where the NSAC will act as a supreme court will overrule their decision, if found they actually won the fight. So, you see, the proposal will give a sort second life or second chance to correct if any mistake has been made, because human is prone to error.

              Comment


              • #27
                So many alts since the shaming of the Pact@rds...

                So many.

                Comment


                • #28
                  the OP didnt fully think this through.

                  you realize every fighter that loses a decision would appeal.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by lefthook2daliva View Post
                    So many alts since the shaming of the Pact@rds...

                    So many.
                    You're probably had the wrong thread, nothing indicates in this thread about being a pact@rd or floydiot; --well now you just revealed yourself as one of those idiots, you're stuck with that nonsense debacle and you bring it everywhere you go. For the start I scored for floyd 9-3 in the fight live, but I am no floydiot just because I feel floyd won the fight and certainly I am no pact@rd; --I am a real fan of the sweet science, apparently, a dying breed in this sport.

                    This thread is all about improving the sport of boxing we love, and your comment is totally out of place and nonsensical, does not help for the betterment of the sport at all.
                    Last edited by ButtScratcher^^; 05-12-2015, 06:41 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by joesaiditstrue View Post
                      the OP didnt fully think this through.

                      you realize every fighter that loses a decision would appeal.
                      You didn't think it through before commenting, you sound like you're just blabbering just to add to your post count even if it's nonsensical.

                      If everyone appeals then everyone has the right for the review, obviously not everyone will appeal because if the fight is so one-sided what's the point of reviewing it, but, if the other team insists, then, he will get a review period.

                      If NBA can do it. Why not in boxing, where lives of the fighters is at stake with every punch?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP