That’s if the fight goes to the scorecards. The fighter that’s losing would be more inclined to go for the knockout which would lead to more excitement.
Even if the scores were to be shown to the people in attendance, why would that be a bad thing? In terms of ruining suspense, I would think that the fighter who is down on the scorecards would be more inclined to go for the knockout which would make for entertaining finishes.
No it wouldn't. Boxing is exciting enough as is. It doesn't need judges round by round scores affecting strategy and fighters mindset. It's bad for fighters to hear the judges scores after a round. Then they are reacting to judges scores rather than to their opponent. You could have a fighter become more discouraged thinking he was in the fight. If a fighter hears scores and as a result now thinks he has no chance to win, he could abandon his strategy and become too aggressive and get caught with a big shot he otherwise wouldn't be caught with. If a match is destined to go to the scorecards then that's what its destiny is. A boxing match shouldn't have its destiny determined artificially by judges.
Isn’t boxing already determined artificially by judges? And I would think that most professional boxers deep down already know if they’re winning or losing during a fight
No, the judges have no influence on whether a fight is stopped or whether it goes to the scorecards. They only influence that when there's so-called open scoring when their scores are revealed during the match.
Right, and that's the way it should be. Pro boxers generally know how well they're doing and if it's close or not, if they are winning. Of course many times there are surprises at the end when the decision is read, but that's part of the suspense, fun and drama of it. Also forcing judges to announce their scores put more pressure on then, and can affect the accuracy of their cards.
I understand your point but I’m all for making judges more accountable. There’s no fun in boxers who sacrifice their entire lives for this sport just to be screwed by nasty decisions which in turn hurt future paydays. Having open scorecards would help the fight against corruption and make people more accountable.
No it wouldn't. It would only add to the percieved corruption in that it would make the so-called corruption affect matches while they are going on instead of only after the match is over.
Your ability to continue to post unhindered by information - "facts", if you will - and sense is impressive
What information and sense are you referring to? People are still complaining about Canelo Trout and the open scoring. Many argued that hearing that he was losing affected Trout's level of confidence. The "sense" from that experience is to learn from that. Canelo may have been winning, some would argue Trout was winning. But regardless why would you inject the judges subjective view of who was winning into the fight itself as is occurring and have their scores influence what is happening? Closed scoring is beneficial to the integrity of a boxing match. The idea of this topic that forcing judges to read out their scores after every round would magically eliminate corruption and would solve all the problems with judging is a pipe dream.
