Comments Thread For: HBO's Lederman Says TV Viewpoint Isn't The Best For Judging

[Liondw]

Most would say Norton beat Ali in 2 out of the 3 fights. It is tough to score from tv at times, as you can't always see if the blows landed cleanly. Also, there are commentators that are very biased, and it can influence your viewing. Other controversially scored fights were Hagler-Leonard, De La Hoya-Whitaker and De La Hoya-Quartey. And, who can forget Whitaker robbed when completely outboxing Chavez.

[Shadoww702]

Fair play to the man. He's passionate about the sport and he's carved out a wonderful career for himself. But those last comments . . . :

“No. Never. I’m always right,” he said. “If I don’t agree with the judges, I say to myself, ‘They’re wrong, I’m right.’ That’s how I feel about it. I also feel like your first score is your best score.

“If you’re scoring a fight, don’t go home and watch it on TV and say, ‘Well, I scored Round 7 differently on TV.’ No. Your best score is your first score, all the time. I don’t know why but that’s just the way it is. If you score it again, deep down in your mind you’ll know how it came out and that influences your thinking.”

. . . highlight for me how he can sometimes be quite dogmatic and inflexible with his scoring criteria. He puts an overemphasis on aggression whether its effective or not and often scores rounds based on what's preceded it rather than scoring the round in and of itself.

That last comment is nonsense of course. He can't help but rescore fights when he watches them back, and he can't help but watch them back because he's a boxing fan. In shielding himself from the acknowledgement that he may have scored rounds incorrectly he's shutting down any opportunity for improvement which is why he still carries those flaws, as I see them.

I largely agree with his comments on watching it live as apposed to on televsion and LoadedWraps post explains the difference beautifully. I wouldn't go as far as agreeing with Harold's statement that you're seeing the fight as it really is though, as if its an entirely objective affair. Reading the fight is always influenced by the personal and cultural preferences and biases that we bring to it. Being involved in the spectacle throws up another set of influences as well. With that said, watching rindside does bring things into awareness that isn't captured through the camera lense.

Well said! If you won't go back and review your results from time to time how are you going to ever improve??? And with the various boxing disciplines how are you not going to constantly review your work??? Sire you can't go back in change it but you can adapt and admit hey you ***ed up!!! This is why judges need to retire or be reviewed more often. It's kind of scary how he even admits he don't give a sht if he's wrong because he's NEVER wrong??? Wow!!!

[Shadoww702]

its best to just watch it with your eyes closed. that way your favorite fighter is always the winner

I do that exact same thing but with the sound off!! And my favorite fighters are all undefeated with 100% KO record.

In seriousness I've scored many times with my favorite fighter actually losing. Can't really sugar coat it... I scored Mayweather losing to Castillo in their 1st fight. Oscar and Floyd were 50/50. And I had Maidana 1 115-113 for Floyd. That was a good fun fight to watch.

[- Ram Raid -]

Well said! If you won't go back and review your results from time to time how are you going to ever improve??? And with the various boxing disciplines how are you not going to constantly review your work??? Sire you can't go back in change it but you can adapt and admit hey you ***ed up!!! This is why judges need to retire or be reviewed more often. It's kind of scary how he even admits he don't give a sht if he's wrong because he's NEVER wrong??? Wow!!!

There's been more than a few occasions when he's scored rounds on 'effective aggression' seemingly for no other reason than one fighter has been given the centre of the ring. Literally given it. Rather than engage with the bigger puncher where he's more likely to better be able to sit down on his shots, one fighter's conceded control of the centre of the ring to keep his opponent moving and less able to set himself.

Harold gives it to the guy in the middle. "Ring generalship" and "effective aggression". The guys barely landed a shot and he's followed his opponent around rather than cut the ring off.

He's given the impression in the past that there's a style of fighting that he feels is the way boxing should be practiced and if it isn't then he'll verge on penalising the fighter that's transgressed his taste. Maybe that's part of the reason that he doesn't review what he's done. Why give consideration to styles contrary to your preference if you've already made up your mind that they're just wrong and you're right?

It then becomes about the judge imposing his or her opinion rather than judging what's in front of them according to set criteria.

[The Akbar One]

One would think Lederman is losing it. TV gives a 360 degree view and as he complains about people at home only get to watch what the director shows us. Well since it is a sporting event the director has no choice but to show the audience only the fight. It is not like the director is going to cut to the dressing room and show a fight between promoters like it is "wrastling".

TV gives a better view period, there is no blind spots like watching it live has.

Lederman is an idiot, as many of his scorecards show.

[job43]

The best way is to judge it the next day because the emotion is gone and you can judge clearly and it is ludacris to think that T.V is not the best way to judge a fight. You can see everything on T.V even the damage and speed of the punches. You can see which punches landed but ringside if he is across the ring with his back to you you can't see squat

[A.K]

lederman needs to retire he scores rounds on who landed the hardest shot not who worked and landed more, although he ends up with a similar score usually as me he scored all the rounds oposite of what i had unless it was clear.

[bojangles1987]

If ringside is so much better, than why do so many judges do such a bad job judging? It's either corruption or incompetence, so pick one.

[LoadedWraps]

Fair play to the man. He's passionate about the sport and he's carved out a wonderful career for himself. But those last comments . . . :

“No. Never. I’m always right,” he said. “If I don’t agree with the judges, I say to myself, ‘They’re wrong, I’m right.’ That’s how I feel about it. I also feel like your first score is your best score.

“If you’re scoring a fight, don’t go home and watch it on TV and say, ‘Well, I scored Round 7 differently on TV.’ No. Your best score is your first score, all the time. I don’t know why but that’s just the way it is. If you score it again, deep down in your mind you’ll know how it came out and that influences your thinking.”

. . . highlight for me how he can sometimes be quite dogmatic and inflexible with his scoring criteria. He puts an overemphasis on aggression whether its effective or not and often scores rounds based on what's preceded it rather than scoring the round in and of itself.

That last comment is nonsense of course. He can't help but rescore fights when he watches them back, and he can't help but watch them back because he's a boxing fan. In shielding himself from the acknowledgement that he may have scored rounds incorrectly he's shutting down any opportunity for improvement which is why he still carries those flaws, as I see them.

I largely agree with his comments on watching it live as apposed to on televsion and LoadedWraps post explains the difference beautifully. I wouldn't go as far as agreeing with Harold's statement that you're seeing the fight as it really is though, as if its an entirely objective affair. Reading the fight is always influenced by the personal and cultural preferences and biases that we bring to it. Being involved in the spectacle throws up another set of influences as well. With that said, watching rindside does bring things into awareness that isn't captured through the camera lense.

Thank you very much -Ram Raid-. Green K sent.

[JTfloyd]

I realized Lederman's scoring was biased when he scored Jirov-Toney a draw. FOH.