I don't think so. The promoters of the A side will get to decide the commentators who would use their position to sway the audience. It would just be a popularity contest.
The answer is easy Hire three HONEST unbiased judges!! But first kick out the State Commissions which is where the corruption starts ,form an International Commission & put Teddy Atlas at the head. NO MORE CORRUPTION !!!!
You think there are politics in the sport now? It would be exponentially worse with ongoing campaigns directed at voters and people voting that have little to no idea what they are watching, etc. There's more than enough of that irl. No thanks.
Or people can learn how to properly score a pro fight using the system already in place. And no, landing 2.5 jabs more per round doesn't win you fights when your opponent is kocking your head around and rearranging your internal organs.
Surely that can't be a serious suggestion. Fights would be getting decided on popularity. Wives and girlfriends attending the shows with their men voting for who they think is the better looking one FFS. You must be having a laugh!
Wanna get rid of judging? Go back to 15 rounds. Stoppages will increase. Also switch the 3 judges to a computerized system where they put in a score for the round its registered and the judge cant go back to alter it or is able to see his scores as the fight progresses.
Slow motion of every exchange need to be analyzed by a group of judges, sitting in another room. May take a bit longer to get the result, but at least there can't be robberies. Fights must be uploaded on Youtube weeks afterwards, so the public can be sure there was no corruption.
I am pretty sure the vast majority of the audience will be impartial and will vote based on what they saw in the fight
Here's my suggestion, for what it's worth. In my opinion for most fights the current 3 judge system is fine. Imagine paying 50 judges, or however many you need, to score what turns out to be a first round knockout. Have the fight scored normally. However if at least two of the three judges return score cards which are closer than 117-111, this will trigger a decision referral and no official result will be announced that night. Firstly, wipe out all three of the live judges cards. Instead the decision will be made by 5 new judges who have yet to watch the fight and have had no contact with anyone to give any hint to how the fight played out. When they sit down to score the fight all they know for sure is that at least two live judges had it fairly close. These 5 then have Sunday morning to watch the fight in silence (no commentary or crowd noises etc.) as many times as necessary whilst having full access to watching a full round in slow motion as well as replays. The official result would then be announced at a public press conference on Sunday evening.
Where do all these judges magically appear from? For every major pro fight on every card in every affiliated country in the world?
I'll throw my idea into the ring. Three judges as we have now, scoring as they do. But instead of comparing their overall score for the fight, they are compared round-by-round. So for example, if two judges score a round 10/9 for Fighter A, but the other scores it 9/10 or 8/10 for Fighter B, then Fighter A wins the round 10/9 on a simple majority. And the same for the other 11 rounds. My thinking is maybe sometimes judges see how they have scored the first eight rounds or so and can be tempted to even things up (for whatever reason). My suggestion would eliminate a judge being able to influence the result with a rank bad card made up of 4-5 poorly-scored rounds. If this system throws up a draw, you then use the current system as a tie-breaker and judge the fight overall. I scored the first GGG vs Canelo fight using this system last week and it came up with 115-113 for GGG. https://puu.sh/Bwc8m/63a6531ad9.jpg