A new modern rule I think that should be implemented is open scoring should be posted after each round. Which fights throughout history would have had a different outcome had the fighters knew it was closer than they thought or they needed a miracle?
Well, there's really nothing new about it. It has been tried several times over the years without much interest in pursuing it. The first time I saw it used was the 1973 welterweight title fight between Jose Napoles and Clyde Gray. But to answer your question, I think perhaps the unification title fight between ODLH and Felix Trinidad could have ended differently. I still had Oscar the winner but if he knew the tightness in scores he could have finished with a flourish rather than lay back those last two rounds, after being told he had the fight won.
It leads to unnatural results like the one in Starling vs. Bumphus, where an accidental headbutt cuts Bumphus, and his corner doesn't even try to close the cut because they already know for sure that they have the lead. You'd also have a lot more fights in which guys would just blatantly run out the clock if they had a lead in the late rounds.
I remember this happening in Jean Marc Mormeck vs Oneil Bell II. The first fight was great with Mormeck ahead but not knowing his lead and continuing to trade with Bell and getting caught. In the rematch the open scoring let Mormeck know he was well out in front and the last 4 rounds lacked the action of the first fight because Mormeck knew exactly how far ahead he was and the drama was taken out of the fight
Open Scoring SUCKS and no fight fan wants that in play! Even as much as we hate bad decisions, the decision is part of the frisson.
Canelo vs Trout comes to mind. If I recall it correctly, Canelo started coasting after learning that Trout needed a KO. This in turn ruined the flow of the fight, and also created a controversial ending as most fans had the first 8 rounds a lot closer than the judges.
A fighter knowing when they were about to clinch or have clinched would be a problem. It would stifle a lot of comebacks as a lot of comebacks are mounted by fighters who don't know how egregiously they are behind. Right now fighters might have a feel for the score but don't know for sure and that not knowing for sure is very important. You'd be turning every round into a reaction to the score.
Pros and cons. It would produce fairer scoring fights and less robberies. It would change the dynamics on if the fights, which wouldn't always be a bad thing. The cut issue would be a massive worry however.
Open scoring in boxing is about as welcome as a headbutt in a phone booth. Once you let the fighters peek behind the curtain, you turn a prizefight into a cautious chess match where risk goes to die and drama gets counted out before the final bell. It encourages coasting when a fighter knows he is ahead. It promotes desperation fouling or reckless swings from a losing fighter. It kills suspense for fans and broadcasters. It can influence judges under public pressure in the middle of the fight. It disrupts corner strategy by shifting the focus to score management instead of fighting. In the end, it strips away the tension, the uncertainty, and the last minute heroics that make boxing worth watching in the first place.
Two reasons why it will never happen , #1 when a judge gives the round to an underserving fighter the crowd would erupt instantly. #2 it would drain all suspense from a decision win.
