New scoring system badly needed! Suggestion inside...

I think the trouble lies with the interpretation judges have with an even round and a [either way close round---more use of 10 / 10 and 10 / 8 for clear dominating performance might help ??-----anybody watch a whole round replayed at a slower speed??:smoke

 

I'm thinking almost about the same.

I was thinking about score by Performance in each rd. Just like Basketball. Sometimes team scores only 10 points in a Qtr But they can also comes back & score 40 points in the other Qtr to make it back in a game.

Let say the other guy is aggressive & trying to make a fight then the other guy is just too defensive & they landed only 11 punch to 7 counters. The judge could scored it as 6-4, something like 60% vs 40% performance wise.

Let say The other Guy Dominated, then he deserves a 10. The other guy landed only a Few shots. Then you can score this as 10-3 because of domination.

If it's close rds I agree with 10-10 of 10-9 if both guys really performs well. If it is like Raheem-Freitas, an ugly-hugging close rds, I'll scored like 4-3 of 4-4.

This not Ten-must but like Percentage by Performance on each fighters. This way you can distuinguish a scoring bout by how they perform. You can easily see if it's an ugly fight or an exciting P4P stuff.
You'll see Pac-JMM2 score as 115-114 while Freitas-Diaz as 60-58. Just like an exciting close Basketball game vs a Boring, ugly, low scorring game.

HBO, SHO & promoters will look at how this fighters score in a fight. They based their purse on Performance. They will be Performance/rd average. Let's say Pac as 97%, JMM as 90%, Floyd-92%, Raheem 52%, Winky 82%. This is like excitement meter. This way boring fighters will get the low pay. This will make the fight exciting too. Because fighters will be compensated if they perform well & trying to be exciting. A guy behind on points always can comeback by fighting a perfect fight in the Championship rounds. Boxing surely will be back if they implement his.

 

Adding a scale like that will make the scoring situation worse, not better.

 

Why score a round level just because its close? If someone won it, even just edging it they desrve more than the other guy.

They just need to make more use of the 10 point must system. 10-9 for a close round, 10-8 for a clear round, 10-7 for total domination. Plus an extra point off any guy that was knocked down. A really bad round with 2 KD's would then be 10-5, and he'd have to dominate a couple of rounds to make up for it, rather than just nick 2 or even win 2 clearly.

That way 1 clear round = two close ones and 1 dominating round = three close ones.

 

100% agree. The current system can be used more fully and should be. Its sooo rare to see a 10-8 round without a KD.

 

I agree with you 100%, they need to use the 10 point system not limit themselves like they have with 10-9 rounds even it it is a complete and total domination.

 

There is no perfect scoring system. Though, I think the 10 point scoring system has historically been pretty effective. IF a change was ever to be made, then it should involve some implementation of the Compubox system. Compubox paints a pretty clear picture most of the time.

 

I suppose it would be good to think of some fights over the past couple of years where controversial scores have been announced etc.

I have been watching boxing for three years, and scoring them for about a year - but one thing I need clearing up......

Say a fighter is winning a round, close-ish 10-9, then suffers a flash KD - does that round (or should that round) be 9-9, or 10-8 against?

I think that there should be more use of 10-10 and 10-8 rounds - if the action appears to be even, then give it even, instead of either guessing or feeling the need to call it, or on the flipside, if a guy is shipping plenty and not returning fire whilst not being in trouble, score it 10-8 - this will hardly lead to 118-117 or 111-109 scores, common sense should be applied.

For instance, look at Naz-Kelley Rd. 1 - Naz wasn't exactly in trouble yet got put down, and would have been judged 10-8 against, whilst Rd. 8 of Hatton Mayweather, Floyd was landing allsorts including a huge right hook - how Hatton didn't collapse in a heap I will never know, yet the round was scored 10-9 to my knowledge.

 

There's no problem with the scoring system since the fighters themselves know about it and they have to and can adapt to it (like flurrying in the final moments, etc.) Since this sport is mainly about making money and fame, whether you change it's rules or not is irrelevant if the promoter has the influence on the judges anyway.

Also I think the 10 point must system works very well if it's used CORRECTLY.



Please mark my words as I've spoken countless times about it and I still think there’s an easy and cheap solution to 70% of the bad situations.

What we really need is unified rules of scoring and expert seminars to educate the sometime horribly uneducated, inexperienced and biased judges and referees. Taking a better look at scorecards, it's very frequent that a judge just has no idea how to right down an extra point. Or sometimes even how to score! They don't know whether to right down 10-8 in the first place or 10-9 and a -1 next to it if there was a KD or a penalty. They have this pressure to always give rounds to a fighter but they don’t focus on the fight to correctly decide who was the better (as they should decide it in every round). Mixing the two corners is another usual thing, you couldn’t imagine how often they do, just get away with it: I see a lot of corrections on the cards. Another thing is they don’t know what the 10 point must system means, I bet 80% have no clue what to write down if the was a double KD in a round.

Judges and sometimes referees are very much under the influence of the hometown fans and they either score a round according their voice or score against the public because they think the fans are too much involved.

Scoring fights like all 3 in favor of DLH in the Sturm fight, or giving the fight to DLH in the Mayweather fight is just the sign of the lack of professional seminars. And that’s not everything! Scoring the fight 120-108 for Navarro in the Mijares or 117-111 for Mendoza in the Erdei fight in just plain and simple stupidity, and yet these are WBC and WBO judges…

If there were unified rules and expert seminars to educate these so-called officials everything would be better. It might not rule out controversy or promoters influence (promoters still have their word at the organizations), but scoring the wrong way would make much more noise since if there’s an exact way to score a fight, if you score it the other way, you have to explain it. There's a good score system called 10 point must system, and if used corretly, it's a good system. But it's far from being used correctly. There's a lot to learn for today's officials, and until that, expect these judges to happily go to Las Vegas, Hamburg, London, Tokyo, Manila etc. for their $500-$2000 paychecks, the 5star Hotels, the expensive but free lunches and post fight VIP parties…

 

I credit your ingenuity Decebal. :good

A simpler way to make the 10 point must system work would be to devise an oversight board to blackball artards like Doug Tucker.