Would judges be better off watching a fight on a monitor backstage?

[dibzvincent143]

I've been to plenty of live fights and sat ringside and IMO the view kinda blows. I prefer to sit up on an angle where I can see over the ropes for a better view of all the action in the ring. The ropes definitely obstruct your view when sitting lower down.

You often see the judges ringside leaning over or trying to get a better view of the action through the ropes because they are not above where they'd be able to see everything going .

Also, you cant beat being at a fight live for the excitement but watching it on TV gives you a much better close up view of the action and better view of every punch thrown.

Imo, judges should also score a round and then hand in that score after every round and not have a tally of their score in front of them to see. That would curb any crying of someone giving a round late to get their guy back in the fight because they know the total score they have right in front of them.

I like most of your points.
They can also make them sit a bit higher than the ring, for clearer view.

And yup they should not have a copy of their recent scores so that they won’t adjust it going to the end just because they think one fighter deserve it more.

[OnePunch]

I've been to plenty of live fights and sat ringside and IMO the view kinda blows. I prefer to sit up on an angle where I can see over the ropes for a better view of all the action in the ring. The ropes definitely obstruct your view when sitting lower down.

You often see the judges ringside leaning over or trying to get a better view of the action through the ropes because they are not above where they'd be able to see everything going .

Also, you cant beat being at a fight live for the excitement but watching it on TV gives you a much better close up view of the action and better view of every punch thrown.

Imo, judges should also score a round and then hand in that score after every round and not have a tally of their score in front of them to see. That would curb any crying of someone giving a round late to get their guy back in the fight because they know the total score they have right in front of them.

That is how it is already done. After every round you can see the referee walk around to each judge and get their scorecard for that round. Then the ref takes the 3 cards to the commission table and they are the ones who transfer each round slip to the master scorecard.

Once the judge turns in their card at the end of every round, they do not have access to change any previous rounds.

[AneesMoha]

Well to discuss the physical issue of neglegiance one has to have provisional faith that competance is a desired outcome.

But there is the faith that the judges will be competent. Proving negligence is very hard since there is no independent regulatory body.

Maybe use an auditing firm to review that results of fights after the fact. And provide the results of their findings to governing bodies.

And in the case of negligence or bias that can be proved using the data available. Judge gets fined and investigate and if there are any irregularities or conflicts of interest (gifts, money, events, dinners, relationships) linked to promoters of governing bodies then action gets taken against all involved.

*cough* Cough* I am an Auditor an would gladly perform this function.

[_Rexy_]

The only way to lessen the blatant corruption is with open scoring. Would also need some kind of governing body that hold judges and other officials accountable for their actions. If a score is challenged, it would go off to an independant committee, and if they find the score to be way off, there'd be repecussions. I'm talking like the judge who scored for Canelo against Mayweather.

Open Scoring is terrible. It would have ruined the incredible fight we had on Saturday.

[_Rexy_]

That is how it is already done. After every round you can see the referee walk around to each judge and get their scorecard for that round. Then the ref takes the 3 cards to the commission table and they are the ones who transfer each round slip to the master scorecard.

Once the judge turns in their card at the end of every round, they do not have access to change any previous rounds.

people never noticed that all the scorecards have the same writing?

[billeau2]

But there is the faith that the judges will be competent. Proving negligence is very hard since there is no independent regulatory body.

Maybe use an auditing firm to review that results of fights after the fact. And provide the results of their findings to governing bodies.

And in the case of negligence or bias that can be proved using the data available. Judge gets fined and investigate and if there are any irregularities or conflicts of interest (gifts, money, events, dinners, relationships) linked to promoters of governing bodies then action gets taken against all involved.

*cough* Cough* I am an Auditor an would gladly perform this function.

There certainly is the issue of the judges along with the system per se, and there are methods to look at the judges. Audits, or any kind of peer review, scrutiny by a state sanctioned body is a good idea.

The judges and the system itself both lack scrutiny and technological improvements necessary...Even football refs (American Football) who have destroyed the NFL in the past (imo) have consented to replay procedures.

[billeau2]

Press scoring?

Here is something to throw out to the thread:

Why not go back to the good ole days and have press scoring?
Lets think about it for a moment: You got essentially 3 individuals, who act as judges, who are usually older, hardly able to see the effect of whether a punch lands, or not, hardly able to see subtlety.

Whats wrong with having a section of the press score the fights? It is democracy in action. Maybe give the ref a special vote as well, they see what is happening the best.

[OnePunch]

Lets not forget that the practice of having the judges sit ringside began long before the invention of TV. Now that we have cameras, having someone judge a fight based on one viewing angle is simply ******ed. They should be watching in a room somewhere, getting the benefit of multiple camera angles.

The only time judges should sit ringside is on small shows with no TV.....

[Johnny2x2x]

Not a chance. Ringside is the only place to really judge a fight. You can feel the punches and hear the fighters' reactions. Judges judge a fight using more than their sense of sight, they also hear and feel what is happening. And the judges have more than just ringside seats, they are right near the canvas, they are practically in the ring with the fighters.

What looks like a solid shot on film sometimes isn't that solid if you're ringside and you hear that it mostly was rolled with and there was no impact or reaction.

And that's why body work is perpetually overlooked by fans, when a fighter lands a good body shot there is an unmistakable thud, and many times there's an audible grunt from the fighter getting hit. People at hoome have no idea what's going on with the body work.

[Lomadeaux]

Imo, judges should also score a round and then hand in that score after every round and not have a tally of their score in front of them to see. That would curb any crying of someone giving a round late to get their guy back in the fight because they know the total score they have right in front of them.

They turn their score in after every round. But I get it, they get to see their tally.