Are robberies in your opinion corrupt or just on the level workplace error? If you chose on the level I'm curious to see solutions to the problem. If it is corruption than solutions to judging wont fix corruption One idea I was thinking a lot about was having cameras where each judge is positioned. If a score is very controversial, even in cases where the result isnt, so say Floyd vs Canelo, the right guy won but a judge was way off or in a robbery where 2 or 3 are off the camera feed of the judges viewpoint will be viewed by 3 judges who will score the fight from that judges perspective. A winner will be declared on that card based on the 3 judges either averaged out or in decision fashion like 2-1 or 3-0 but in the event of a split draw maybe tie goes to the runner and the original score is upheld. I guess if a judge is way off the other 3 judges scores by like 2 or 3 or more it suspends them from the next few events and they have to explain themselves to their boss Other ideas Ive seen are to have judges at a higher vantage point or to have them in an isolated sound proof booth watching it on film At the end of the day do we just have to say judging boxing is difficult as hell and that the criteria is so subjective that 10 people can see a fight and all see it having gone differently or having a different conclusion.
Julie Lederman had Chavez 116-112 Bradley. Thats borderline corruption but if you look at some other scorecards she has put in you cant but think shes competent and knows her ****. Human error is always present.
Depends. If you have 45 minutes to kill, go to youtube and watch Tyrone Everett-Alfredo Escalera for me, and report back here with your impressions. I'd be interested to hear the take on that one from some who might not have seen it.
I didn't want the thread to just turn into 1 fight arguments You say Lederman is terrible. Looking at her boxrec judging record brings Agreement with one judge and a point higher than the other in unanimously having Vanes M beating W Nelson Agreement with another judge in Karpency over Dawson in a fight I remember no outcry about A score for Bey over Vazquez but close considering she had it 7-5 Bey when the other judge for Bey had it by 10, the judge for Vazquez had it 7-5, wrong but not horrific like the other guy In the UD for Taylor over Mayfield she had the right call but by 5 instead of by 1 like the other 2 had I went as far back as page 5 and saw she had Scott vs Glaskov even but wasn't as bad as the guy who had if for Glaskov there were like 10 or more full pages of fights and only a hand full were bad to awful...does this even mean shes that bad at what she does or had a few off nights if she is corrupt is it only on the tv fights like say the Bradley one or the Glaskov Scott one? But if she is corrupt, whose benefitting from Chavez getting a win on one card?
If you just look at the numbers it's pretty damn sure it rarely is incompetence and almost always in favor of the home/featured/hyped fighter. If you also count the "can go either way" decisions, the picture is even clearer that incompetence has little to do with it.
Yeah, those bad decisions, they almost always happen to swing to the fighter the promoters would rather win.
My English is a bit off at times. What i was trying to point out is that Lederman ****s up every now and then. It´s just that she ****ed up pretty bad with the Bradley-Chavez draw and it looks "suspect" imo. But looking at her other scorecards you can see that she is a decent judge. So human error does play into bad judging, it cant be helped really. Just like referees dont see, foot stomping, elbows, headbutts, low blows etc. Commisions missing padded gloves. Drug tests failing to catch cheaters.
Both but more corrupt, as Malignaggi said it almost always the more politically connected fighter who get favored by the judges.
