I think showtime have made a massive balls-up with the super 6 scoring system!!!

It's pretty much in tune with boxing tradition.
You can get screwed badly if it goes the distance.

 

A loss is a loss.

 

I'd give a point for the split decision loser. And you know what? The best thing might've been appointing the same 6 judges accepted by all 5 promoters to score ALL fights (6 is necessary due to joint venue events). I feel Dirrell got jobbed in a very close fight, but despite it was close, I just don't see how the guy who clearly landed more, better % and more hurting punches lost. The point system is not unfair. The judges score were.

 

An S/D loss is still a loss. That's fair. Fights are scored on a majority basis, not a consensus. Froch received a majority decision, why should Dirrell be given credit for losing closely.

 

IMO there is no real right or wrong answer.

Scoring is subjective of course.

What is worse, losing a split decision when it ought to have been UD (say Witter vs Bradley) or being stopped whilst ahead on the cards (say Moorer vs Foreman).

I understand your point fully, however :good

 

To be honest i don't really see this as a legitimate concern. A split decision loss is still a loss. The only reason its a big deal is because Dirrell got roughted, but thats the judges fault, not the super six systems fault.

Rewarding any form of loss isn't really a good precedent. Do you want to give him 1/3rd of the belt too? What happens when one ******edly biased judge gives the losing fighter the edge (happens all the time, disgraceful examples like Katsidis - Diaz), and he undeservedly gets 1 point?

Its understandable that people are pissed about the poor decision, but thats boxing, and this would be an equally flawed kneejerk resolution in my opinion.

 

I think they should have gone for something like the European Rugby points system, 4 points for a win and 2 for a draw. Then you could have had a 1 point bonus by losing by a split and a 1 point bonus for winning by KO.

The only thing is they might have wanted to keep it simple. If you have to explain it too much to casual fans it might be off putting.

 

The guy who has the worst record (i.e. most losses) would go out. Simple...

 

It would certainly have been a good idea to award a single point for a split decision loss.

 

The system stimulates agressive fighters. You can waltz 12 rounds and lose a decision or take risks and get KOed in an exciting fight. I like the second scenario.

 

I actually think that the whole way in which we score fights in imprecise and subjective. It's not necessarily that the individual judges get it "wrong", its the scoring system itself which needs to be overhauled (just don't ask me how).

More judges so we get a consensous decision from a range of people, rather than the subjective opinions of three. Make the judges better trained....with access to a compu-box type system that shows accurate stas during the fight, perhaps.

 

I sympathize with your concern completely. But it is what it is.