...and no, I don't mean Adrien Broner. Despite the right man winning last night, two of the three judges scorecards were abysmal. I have scoured the internet this morning and have found that 99% of the fans, media, boxing experts and analysts had Ward winning this fight 116-112 at the worst. Most had Andre winning 117-111 or 118-110. I even saw some 119-109. So then let me ask you, how do two of the three judges responsible for determining the outcome have this fight 115-113? A round away from a draw. It comes down to one of two things: 1. Corruption - highly unlikely in this case. What would the point be? 2. General Ineptitude - most likely in this case. Something needs to be done, and done fast. Boxing as a whole will continue to suffer until this judging situation can be remedied. Judging in boxing is broken and getting worse. So I am looking for suggestions. There are some great boxing minds on this site. I will start with a few of my own (again these are just ideas): 1. Expand from three to five judges. 2. Have the ref as one of the five judges. 3. Incorporate more ex-boxers as judges. 4. Start a boxing judging training school. 5. Reposition the judges - I have been a member of the boxing media and sat ringside for numerous fights. I even sat right next to one of the judges at a fight last year. I can't believe how hard it is to see the fight. Again, this is a simple change. Any others? I love this sport and can't stand to see the way this sport is being judged currently.
It would not surprise me if those two judges didn't start giving Froch rounds down the stretch to avoid any accusations of bias. The U.K judge is the only one who didn't have to worry about that and he scored it 118-110. Regardless, judges shouldn't let outside factors effect scoring.*
1) more judges more bad scorecards 2) most refs suck at being just a referee 3) just because they are ex boxers dont make them good judges..an ex slugger might always favor a slugger, same with a boxer 4) good idea 5) good idea 6) suspend judges who have the one outlandish score card and make them explain how they came to their scoring by reviewing the fight with them
Exactly what I was thinking... Every judge knew that Ward was winning that fight comfortably. I'm interested in seeing which rounds those other judges gave Froch. I suspect 9, 11, and 12. If so, I think this theory is well-founded.
One obvious step would be to give judges monitors for cameras at every side. That way, they can get an even better perspective than the viewers at home. It would only be practical for big fights, but they are the fights that hurt the reputation of boxing if there are dodgy decisions.
I think Iceman nailed it when he said boxers can't be objective. After all, even Froch said he thought he did enough to win the fight. They always say that!
After the third Pac/JMM bout, I realized the scoring system needs to be updated. Im not saying this is the answer ( it may be a terrible idea, even ), but why not actually judge/score each of the scoring criteria ie ring generalship, effective aggression, defense and even punch percentage? A judges score would look something like this for a round; 10 points for RG, 10 points for aggression, 9 points for defense, etc. For each of the categories, a point would be given ( or taken away, depending on your view ) for KD, like they already do. Is this an idea worth exploring, or is it silly? I like the thought of having ex boxers judge fights, too. However, that doesnt ensure a proper outcome. Still a very good idea and something that should be looked into.