The case for 20 point rounds

2 plus 2 is 4, minus 1, that's 3, quick maths.

 

Your first paragraphs, where you are laying out the problem, are mostly true.

Your last three, where you propose a solution, are less persuasive.





Better solution would be combined scoring. The three judges score independently, but wham it comes to the final tally, fighters are only credited with winning a round where all three judges agree on that round.

All other rounds are considered drawn.

The fight is scored on rounds, 11 per fight and 13 for title fights.

Weigh-ins at 12:01 am on fight day.

 

Really boxing is complicated enough as is....

rounds should only be rewarded to the winner.

1 point for who's round it was...0 for the loser.

2 points for a knock down ..3 for 2 knock downs a round!

A dominant round with no knockdown that can't be disputed is also a 2 point round.

This would cut off all confusion and jargon!


The solution is less points not more and make it fan friendly.

 

What the hell did i just read..

Lets make the scoring a 985-984 system.
Knowdowns bring the score down to 963
Standing 8 counts bring the score to 976
Deducting a point brings score down to 981

 

Neither do I.

But if we only counted unanimously agreed upon rounds, it would eliminate some of the BS scoring.

 

I appreciate the idea, but it seems too complicated for me.
My suggestion is:
First, to encourage the judges to score more even rounds, cause in my opinion some rounds are just that close where neither fighters insert a dominance.
Second, add 2 more judges.
As I understand, all 3 judges sit on each side of the ring and one side for journalist.
Why not for big title fights, pick one of the journalist and make him one of the official scorer of the particular fight. Now, a journalist could be bias but they are also easier to be held accountable cause they interact with the media and masses, unlike the disappearance of judges after controversial fight.
The fifth judge should be in a separate booth away from the arena, watching the telecast without commentary on.

 

Say, I like this idea.

Of course, it will never happen. The powers-that-be like things just the way they are. Heck, if they could just find a way to prevent those pesky knockouts, they could control EVERYTHING !

 

Going by 20s is just too ugly, but I actually agree with the principle of the idea. And I've been thinking of something similar.

A related issue is the fact that referees don't have a lot of latitude in penalizing fighters.

If a fighter is doing something "bad," what can the referee do? Either nothing, or deduct an entire point, where a point is huge. The equivalent of losing a round. It's simply too extreme in many cases.

It would be better if referees could deduct smaller quantities to better control the fighters.

Maybe 10 points to round winners, 5/0 points to round losers depending on their level of success? Maybe -10 points for a KD? And the ref could perhaps deduct like 5 points for misconduct.

I don't know why I'm bothering with this though, it will never happen.

 

Yeah, but you could easily do this already with the 10-point scoring system. Judges just need to be instructed to be more flexible on how they score a round. In other words, it's not the number of points assigned, it is how you use the points.