An Indonesian Boxing Commission is suggesting for the Judges to keep their individual scorecards, and then make a judgement on who won the fight, after the bout has been completed. The fight will be evaluated, as an overall performance, not just 'individual rounds', where point totals tend to confuse the fans and viewers. So far, it has worked perfectly in several tested bouts.
People question judges now. Can you imagine what it would be like if they did that? When not only can they interpret the scoring criteria for an individual round, but for the entire fight? Disaster.
This is a perfect system.. FOR HONEST JUDGES. The current system is also perfect... FOR HONEST JUDGES!!!!
At least they are trying something. If a Boxer 'A' wins the first 5 rounds of a fight by lightly jabbing and moving, but is not overly dominant. Then Boxer 'B', dominates the last '5' rounds, by completely dominating each round. Is the fight, then a Draw, or does the Scoring Judge have the discretion of making an opinion on the 'overall performance'.
Needs Changing, More Even Rounds should be scored. Or More 10 -8 rounds for when its a clear round for one fighter. the current scoreing system doesn;t work. That was never more cleat than the Manny Bradley fight. Where Manny clearly won 5. Bradley Clearly won 1. 6 rounds you could score Either Way. Manny should have won but nder current rulings you cannot argue with the result because manny onlt dominated in 5 of the rounds.
I dont like the Idea of this, theres nothing wrong with the current scoring, just **** judges whove never even stepped inside a ring
I dont get it, what's the point of scoring if they evaluate the fight as a whole and not by amount of rounds won?
Round Scoring is definitely used as a 'tool' but the 'Final Decision' is based on the 'Overall Performance'.
Kind of a k1 type scoring. Judge the whole fight as one, in boxing you could completely dominant 5 rounds and still lose the fight. You you've landed more punches in a few rounds then lose in some not so active rounds. You may have totaled I higher connect rate and still lose. Judging the fight as a whole isn't such a bad idea I just don't think it will work.
I strict judgment call . . . where no one can pass judgement on how they scored each round? I say 5 judges with one being a survey of writers or judge in a silent booth and a moniter.
Is there any reason why ex pros can't be judges, no one can judge a fight better than people who have actually fought. Imagine the 3 judges being Roy jones, tarver and Lewis.
that doesn't make much sense to me. what if a guy on the scorecards wins the majority of the rounds? he can still get the nod based on overall performance going by this scoring method. it has to be one or the ther imo.