Split and majority decisions should they be ruled a draw

And of couse the split cards in Lewis Holyfiled, got that right, it was a draw lol.

 

Some would argue, and I'm just advocating on the devil's behalf, that the judges should be more competent and that many rounds that could go either way, in fact, do not do so.

 

That's a good option. Make competence a requisite.

 

So that means you'd only need to knobble one judge in order to be guaranteed a draw? Or one bad judge make a clear decision a draw?

Its OK as it is now IMHO, majority draws, where the 'third' judges card is not counted, are as far as we need to go in that direction.

 

I think 13 rounds would decrease the amount of draws in the sport. Depending on possible point deductions, a draw might still be awarded.

The odd number here means the the last round will be dependent on who's the winner. Assuming both fighters are level after 12 rounds with no point deductions for either fighter, etc, etc.

Some people favored this before 15 rounds were finally abolished.

 

Do you think putting 13 rounds would be better for judging ? But by logic, I guess more knockdowns happen at the 13th round, so it can also be ruled draws easily..

I agree that more fights should be ruled draws, but it can also go the other way (a fight ruled a draw while there is a clear winner).. An as fans do you guys like when a fight is ruled a draw? ..

Guy Jutras, an ex-judge was talking about a new kind of judging system, allowing more, 10-(8,7,6,5 ) scores, and giving an extra point in the last round to (ie 11-9) and recompensing the fighter who is very active in the last round (seriously how many guys totally gas out in the 12th). Maybe it is a good idea...

 

I think we should be trying to get away from draws, rather than finding more ways to award them.

 

That's what I think too, when I look at draws on a record I find it disappointing, and there is certainly a more objective way to elect a winner (compubox? even if it's not accurate at all sometimes or using other kinds of criterias - when a fight is ruled a draw add the scoring of the press section? but it may be not objective), but draws are also possible..

 

Then we need to use more of the 10 points in the 10 point must system or use more judges, say 5 or 7. I'm not saying those are better ways of doing things but the current way is pretty good. The original suggestion of letting 1 judge overrule 2 judges will get more draws but it won't get fairer decisions, most 'splits' get it right IMHO.

 

Judges should be qualified and competent.

Having said that, my answer to the question is no. Boxing becomes a subjective sport once a bout goes to the scorecards. We have an odd number of judges with a purpose - to get a result.

Of course, a draw is possible even with an odd number of judges, as we have seen many times.

 

I can't agree...especially considering the times where you seem to get one loony judge with a dozy scorecard way out of whack.

Adamek-Cunningham was a split decision last night. So that should've been ruled a draw?
I really don't think so.

How about having 4 or 5 judges instead?

 

Maybe there is a need to step back and make all fights no decision bouts. That way you eliminate controversial decisions and make the challenger go all out to beat the champ.

It would also put greater pressure to bring back the proper championship distance of 15 rounds, so we get more results.