If a round is Close and Hard to Score: what's wrong with just Giving it to the Champ

When the round is close and hard to score, we give it to the hometown / promoter’s fighter.
How long you have been watching boxing boy?!

 

- If it's a WBC fight and the champ is Hispanic or Deontay Wilder all rounds that aren't complete shut outs are awarded to him.

- If the opponent is also Hispanic or related to Deontay Wilder all even rounds are given to the fighter with better full body tattoos. This will be evaluated by Mauricio Sulaiman in the locker room prior to the fight and the decision cannot be rescinded.

- If, in extreme circumstances, the champ is neither Hispanic nor Deontay Wilder, an application for non-standard treatment must be made to Mr Sulaiman in the form of donations to his private bank account. The successful applicant will be informed prior to the fight via email.

- If the champ is both Hispanic and Deontay Wilder then yer fooked.

 

Judges are literally being PAID to judge a round.

It's fine for fans to watch a round and say, "I couldn't tell who won that." We're fans. We're watching it for entertainment.

Judges are doing a job. Their job is to JUDGE who won the round. They have criteria. They need to judge who won the round based on that criteria. The criteria is there to help them score close rounds in favor of one person or the other.

They need to do the jobs they are being paid to do.

One judge in the first Leonard-Duran fight scored in favor of Duran 3 rounds to 2 with 10 rounds scored even. And it was considered a ludicrous scorecard. The judge was basically saying out of 15 rounds, I thought the challenger won three of the 15, so he is the new champion.

He needed to do his JOB much better. You don't award the title to someone who won three of 15 rounds against the reigning champ.

It's fine for fans to say, "Boy, almost every round was too close to call." Judges aren't supposed to do that.

They are there to JUDGE between two sides.

 

There is no champ when the bell rings. Also you don't give a rnd. Rnds are earned.

 

This is just another veiled attempt to say Wilder realy won the fight because he is the champ ect ect

 

If it is close, there is always someway to figure who won. Just use your gut feeling.

 

That's stupid. If you win a round, you win a round regardless of who's the champion. I'll never understand this thinking.

If it's very close and you can't split them, then give it it a 10-10 instead of looking for reasons that don't exist to justify giving fighter A or B the round.

 

Absolutely not. I find it incredibly rare that a round is so damn close that it has to be given a draw anyway. There's so much scoring criteria to use.

 

Sounds daft. In football if it's 0-0 in a close game why not just give the defending champions a goal ?

 

I prefer that very close rounds be called even.

I prefer that the house or 'money' fighter not be favoured.

That is all.

 

This...WTF, its not being neutral is it lol...Like you say, there is such thing as even/draw rounds !

 

Can you explain how giving an even round when neither fighter has done enough to win it isn't judging a round?

If i fully evaluate a round and conclude that neither fighter did enough to win it, you want me to side with the champ just because?

If i am wrong, may i get struck by an official boxing rule book, that clearly states that an even round cant be given.... Oh no, wait,.....

 

And yeah, totally fine with the official rule that states in the event of a draw over 12 rounds, the champ keeps the belt, but i am not happy with a close round being given to the champ just because.

Makes absolutely no sense to me.

"You've got to rip the belt out of the champs hands!"

No mate, you just have to score more points over 12, and that should be more than enough

 

Canelo.

 

I hate the logic that the champ/hometown/promoters fighter gets the close rounds but I do consider it when scoring a fight which is why at 6 in the morning the absolute mess of a man I was, was telling my mates that fury hasn't won until the judges say so. We all knew in any other scenario that fight was furys but considering the champ/homefighter/promoters fighter was wilder I knew there was enough there to steal the win of fury. But I think the bias is heavily in the favour of promoters fighter. Hence canelo and more recently less noticeable zach Parker beating daryl williams by doing far less then wilder did against fury.