Are there accounts of judges being paid off? Do judges go back and change their score from an earlier round? Do they agree amongst themselves to split a close round? Also, how common is corrupt judging really? How much evidence is there that it exists?
https://thegruelingtruth.com/boxing/history-bad-judging-canelo-alvarez/ Judges don’t go back and change scores or anything obvious, the subtlety in how they operate when paid off has to do with judges criteria. Effective aggression and Ring generalship can mean something to one judge and something different to another. Activity may be worth more to certain judges and there are hardly ever consequences to bad cards other than some social media hate.
It isn't common. The three judges sit on three different sides of the ring and write down their scores at the end of each round. A fourth official picks up their scores after each round and writes them down on one master card. That way, no one can go back and change their scores. Each judge sits on a different side of the ring so one might be able to see something the other two miss if their views are blocked. That is why the three judges often disagree. None of the three are watching the fight from the same angle. Each has a completely different view of the fight. The announcers, press, and main tv cameras are all on one side of the ring - the fourth side where none of the judges are sitting. So they tend to all watch the fight from the same view but not from the actual view of any of the official judges. So the media and announcers often agree, since they are all sitting on the same side of the ring and can hear each other talk. Some judges do suck. Some are biased. But, mostly, people just like to complain because they don't agree with the result.
I'd like to know more myself. There's a structural conflict of interest in that if the big promotable fighter wins then there are more big, promoted fights that will pay big bucks for judges. Of course, if you as a judge have a reputation for picking the politically convenient winner then you may find yourself consistently hired for these fights. The other thing is outright bribes. Bob Arum testified that he bribed the IBF to get a beatable opponent ranked for Foreman's comeback. He said he offerred one amount but only paid half after learning they (allegedly) shook down Foreman's camp. There was nothing about bribing judges but it would be strange to bribe sanctioning bodies but not their judges.
let me guess saunders was clearly ahead dominating versus canelo in your opionion. until a lucky punch saved him
It used to be common practice to have parties inviting officials of all levels of the sport and lavish them with "gifts". So in a close round, who's it going to? I don't think there's any conflict of interest rules in boxing because it's unregulated.. I could be wrong though... it's been known to happen.
The judges aren’t “paid off” per se. But in cases like Canelo fights these are prestigious assignments with a a nice check attached. You keep these opportunities coming when you steer to the A-Side. Going against the grain isn’t helping a judge out when it comes to getting these prime assignments going forward.
Whomever is writing those checks needs to pick smarter judges. You'd think they at least hint that they should keep the scorecards close to avoid suspicion.
I think judges are reckless because there is no commission which reviews the scores they make. They can score it unfairly and they can get away with it.
Here's a brown paper bag..........can I have a receipt...........ummm no............f--k it, ok.......
the promoter is responsible for paying the judges fees. (sanctioning body should be responisble). The promoter is responsible for paying judges hotel cost and per-diem . (sanctioning body should be responsible). what other perks could the promoter be giving free chips at all the tables. Car service for the weekend. Free drinks at the bars, and a bed warmer. not saying the judge is crooked, but after all the promoter has done for him but he is damn sure going to give his fighter the benefit of the doubt. If its too close to call. for get about it. sanctioning bodies not doing their job could be the problem.
I actually think that judges are probably in one of the worst positions for actually scoring a fight. Their viewing angle is too low to see the fight properly - maybe they should just be sat in cubicles watching live footage (no commentary) of the fight from a higher up angle to get a better overall view.
