Real boxing fan' vs The Juges

There are fans who are better too. Ratio wise sure....though Doug Tucker may have a lower ratio than you have listed. But you can't accurately say that there aren't people on this site who judge fights better than some judges. All of us have looked at a fight and wondered what a particular judge saw and would have most other judges agree with us if independently polled, as well as boxing writers. It's not like the criteria for judging fights has a special skill set. It is more about them being closer to the action that can give them an advantage.

 

See so true boxing is an extreme...because truthfully, not many remember that play unless a diehard UM fan (even they have let it go) But in Boxing..theyd even remind you that JMM was the winner of JMM/PAc 1, youve actually forgotten that it was a draw..This forum is full of revisionists gone wrong

 

I think I understand what you just did, but I don't agree. Yes they see a different angle than us....only one angle at that, so we don't see things from their perspective. But the fact that we have more angles allow us to see punches they don't sometimes. Isn't that fair and accurate? We also have the advantage of rewatching something now....so while it may not be fair to criticize and say we can do what they are doing at ringside, it's not wrong to imply that my view from home may help me judge a fight a bit better sometimes.

 

Like I've already said, judges are seeing a different fight then people at home. When assesing a judges performance, I believe you have to first and foremost look at how the other judges scored the fight. You should also look at how ringside observers scored the fight. The network commentators are sometimes helpful, but they can be very biased.

 

I am simply saying that fans at home who know the sport can have valid and sometimes more accurate assessments of a fight due to any number of circumstances. I don't feel that that statement is false at all.

 

Just curiosity, do judges go thru some training..you know..have a set guidelines of what to look for..I mean after all they are professionals and Im sure theyve seen their share of 4 rounders..

look you can always armchair these guys but the fact is the problem most fans have that judges dont is that if a round is a toss up round...the judge have the objectivity to give it to either fighter, while we as fans will surely give it to who we like or biased toward 10 out of 10.

 

Possibly. Where the problem lies and when fans start claiming that judges are corrupt and start making up their own results; failing to realize that they're are seeing a different fight than the judges. It's ridiculous how everything is a conspiricy nowadays.

 

Not every fan likes a certain fighter in a fight though. And judges are fans too.

This isn't what I thought this thread was about. I am not talking about fans being able to judge a fight from ringside better than a judge. I think most fans would be overwhelmed. I am saying that we have perspective advantages sometimes that give us a better viewpoint from home. From ringside, most judges are certainly more adept than any of us would be.

 

You're missing Chimba's point; which is that judges are trained to look for certain things when they are judgind these fights. Fans sitting at home are not. Given their professional training, experience, professional objectiveness, and close proximity to the action, it's a far cry to assume that fans are going to be able to judge the fight more accurately at home then they can live at ringside. It's not impossible, but not very likely.

 

I didn't miss the point. I just don't agree. We know the judges criteria for judging a fight. We can see nearly all the punches. We can see the effect and hear the punches impact. We can, if we are truly paying attention, see who is controlling the pace and action. Who is leading the other fighter. A long time fan (10+ years) can see all these things. I don't agree that judges have abilities that we do not.

 

Most fans at home simply score agession. Look at the people on this site, they'll constantly talk about one fighter pressing the action. However, they rarely comment on how effective the agression was, many don't seem to know about ring generalship, defense is totally over looked, and clean effective punching is devalued. That's not the proper way to score a fight.

 

This may be true. But the posters whose opinions I respect on this site, who I am referring to when saying that there are some fans who can certainly judge things from their home pretty accurately, rarely show such limited perspective. Brooklyn would be an example, as would someone like Manassa or ACB. Quite a few others as well. But they are a minority of the site.

 

I agree if thats the crux of what you are saying
Yes you miss part of my point though...Ok lets say I dont like either fighters...Im from Scandinavia or something...Gee I cant stand PacDbest and the Pacfanatics, let me tick that round to JMM..Cmon man youve seen these fools antagonize certain groups here and this goes for any fighters Joe, Pac PBF, Hop..even jones for ****s sake. One reason most in these forums dont have credibility giving opinions

 

Theres always some idiot screaming robbery after every fight, fan vote judging would turn boxing into WWE.

 

Yes...I have seen fools do it. But I am not referring to them. Notice I have said there are fans and posters here who can do it. Some of them. Certainly not all. I didn't miss the point at all. I am not referring to a large percentage of the general population.

Not everyone has a bias for alot of fighters. I for instance only like RJJ. I am fans of a few fighters, but only root unconditionally for Jones Jr.