Corruption or Stupidity?

Sometimes stupid sometimes corrupt. Mostly stupid though.

 

Mostly corruption. There are a lot of examples where quality judges, all of a sudden, don't know how to score a fight.

In regards to the Ward-Froch example that was, more a less, giving Froch the benefit of the doubt. There was a lot of hoopla before the fight where an American and an Englishman were two of the three judges. If I recall, John Keane (the Englishman) had it 118-110 for Ward. He probably didn't want to come across as a homer for Froch. While the American judge didn't want to be a homer either and gave a couple of swing rounds to Froch.

 

I doubt that it is stupidity, these judges are being paid legitimately to judge fights. Sometimes they're probably either paid off (corrupt), or are simply too afraid to judge against a fighter, if he either has a huge crowd behind him or a powerful promoter.

 

bit of both, really

 

Corrupt, of course.

End of discussion.

 

More often than not, I think corruption.

Occasionally, I will score a fight differently live than I will when I watch the replay on TV. You just don't see everything from one angle. So, I'm a little more lenient when a judge scores a competitive round or two differently than I do.

But I have a hard time watching a fight scored by Gale Von Hoye and believing it's on the level.

 

Of course it's corruption.. lol, come on.

The only misunderstanding is that the judges are being directly "paid off" like they're secretly getting cash in envelopes the week of the fight. That would be too risky.. so what typically goes on is that if judges don't score in favor of the people making money from the fight and future fights, they don't get hired as much to judge fights in the future.

 

If stupidity was really the main issue most of the time, you'd expect a more even distribution of bad decisions for the house and non-house fighters. Given the fact that the vast vast majority are instead in favor of the former, I think suspicions of corruption are frequently well warranted.

 

Definitely corruption. If it was stupidity you would see plenty of instances were the guy who was the star or was expected to win getting robbed but it is nearly always the other guy.

I can only think of two instances when the person getting robbed was the star. One is Pacquaio/Bradley but even then there is plenty of reasons why Arum might have wanted Bradley to win. The other one to a much lesser extent is Trinidad/De la hoya.

 

Corruption. Without a shadow of a doubt

 

Mostly corruption. I mean some scores can be blamed on stupidity. Like when a judge's scores are 1-2 rounds off from the general consensus. But when we have those utterly unexplainable scores where it's 5-6 rounds off from the general consensus, it has to be corruption. I wonder how much these judges get paid to throw a fight. Can't be more than a few thousand.

 

that is what I think it is. the judges support the "home" fighter cause otherwise they wont get work again.

 

They judge in favour of the big name / promoters fighter in order to get future work imo.