Boxing needs a new scoring system

Would 15 rounders really help?

I think we'd just get even more idiotic scores

 

Yes but you can get idiotic scores regardless of how many rounds there are. I think me & eze were taking the thread slightly off topic there.

 

Ah, fair enough

I'm not sure about 15 rounders. I take the point they might be fitter, but they just aren't used to it like the good old days. I think there would be a lower intensity in the opening rounds, and a lot of spoiling in 12-15

It would turn a decent fight into a scrappy one

 

Fair point but I really meant to make it an option for real World title fights only.

 

I think that the system is fine. There isn't sport which has perfect officiating.

Personally I just think that it is fighters fault if he leaves the decision to judges.

 

True.

False. This is boxing not Super Knockout.

 

lmao.

true i like the 10 point system. there will always be shitty decisions.

 

I doubt Bernard would be too thrilled at the prospect :shock:

 

Nah he's a throw back, he'd love it.

 

But I do think KO is what fighter should strive for.

 

All three judges scores are added together.

Each judge awards one point to the fighter he/she feels won the round; no points to the loser. If the judge thinks the round is a draw he awards no points to either fighter.

If a fighter wins a round by two clear points (either 2-0 or 3-0) the fighter shall recieve a bonus point.

If a fighter scores a knockdown they recieve three bonus points.

A referee can deduct on their discretion from a fighter, anything from one to three points for fouls. (in theory this may mean a fighter ends up with a negative total.)

 

The scoring system doesn't need to be changed. The judges are responsible for bad decisions, so they're the one's to blame, not the scoring system.

 

Not always true. I think most believe Tommy kcked Ray's arse in their 1988 rematch and yet the fight was a draw. I am a huge Hearns fan and hate Leonard, but I can see why it was scored a draw.

The problem with 10 point must is that if you can win six rounds 10-9 by dominanting the entire rounds, but not score a knockdown; the other six rounds you could lose because the judge thinks your opponent landed an extra jab or two in a close round; thus the fight is even, even though you were pretty much in control.

This kind of happened (in a more complicated way) in the Leonard/HearnsII fight.

 

Some fights would be terrible for 15 rounds, but some would be so much better. I mean, Frazier-Ali 1, the last 3 was the most actionfilled an for me, the most entertaining. Fx, wouldn't it be fun to see another three rounds in the Calz-Kess fight? But it won't happen anyway.

 

Fight to the death