The judging in boxing..Can it be improved?

Judging is subjective. You see it with your friends. Two guys watch the same fight and see two different things. He likes brawling. You like boxing. He likes footwork. You like guts. On and on. Add to that the crooked crap? There is a very simple solution...

Change boxing from 12 to 11 or 13 rounds and force judges to do a write-up after the match. Most of the judging problems will be solved.

 

give the judges instant replay so they can decide for themselves if there was a bad call or not.

 

Maybe have them judge in a different room watching on a TV with no crowd influence just themselves in a room.

 

Judges could be held accountable for their scoring and have to explain it.

 

Exactly. Judge the fight. Write notes. Provide scores and notes at the time of the fight. Within a week of the fight re-watch and submit a report on the fight. Archive it with the commission. All confidential unless the scores are disputed. Then the reports and an interview is all made public.

Pay them decent and license them. F up lose your license.

No accountability provides crap results all of the time.

 

1. Have 5 or more judges. In the current system, one corrupt or incompetent judge (out of three judges) can make a huge difference in the outcome. The more judges, the less power and influence each have since their votes have less weight.
2. Instant Replay for judges and referee.
3. Camera angles all over.
4. Have the judges be in an enclosed room away from the crowd. They should have a computer to do the instant replays, and access to all camera angles.

 

There should be a way to overturn stupid decisions. Hearns-Leonard II for example.

 

LMAO, you would have to cut like 99% of judges. They are lucky to know how to email let alone use an automated replay system! :yep

 

Yep. Rematch or the fight gets called a NC.

 

My company designs t-shirts, etc for Andre Ward and I was lucky enough to sit Ringside for his fight against Edison Miranda. And by ringside, I mean, I could literally touch the ring during the fight. I cant believe how difficult it is to watch a fight from that close. And that's where the judges sit. You are blinded and/or blocked by the ref or one of the other fighters 50% of the time. That night shed a whole new light on this topic for me. People talk about corruption, incompetence, etc (which I'm sure does happen), but simply put, half the time they can't see the fight. It's comical really.

 

I've said this a million times, the only way the judging will get better is by getting rid of them altogether. Let the fighters fight till one doesn't get up any longer. No more bad decisions, robberies etc, the fighter who wins really will have won. It's also likely to mean that the fatties who can't be assed with conditioning won't last in the sport much longer, good riddance to tubbies.

 

5 judges, all in soundproof booth, cannot hear crowd. One judge's scorecard thrown out for each round. Fractional points allowed for rounds, e.g. 10-9.5.

Last but not least, judges are randomly assigned to fights. Judge's performance is evaluated with respect to their peers, e.g. if a judge is frequently having his rounds "throw out" then this is reflected on his record somehow.

All of these things would be easy to do. So why don't they? Because the promoter's like it just the way it is for obvious reasons.

 

Wouldn't work. Here is an example: Lets say a fight happened between fighter A and fighter B. 2 judges have fighter A winning, 2 have it a draw, 1 has it for B. Now Who won the fight? It creates a discrepancy in scoring because No outcome would be correct. Where as 3 judges, that occurring is impossible because Majority wins.

Secondly, the judges have some of the best seats in the house and would still be affected by crowd noise if they were in some remote room because they have to have audio being piped in via the feed they are watching. Also the amount of time for all the judges to go through replays of specific moments in the round would take a long time, which would give advantage most likely to the fighter that was hurt in the sequence they were reviewing.

What should occur should be that Judges should be required to take mandatory eye exams every six months or so. They should sit in with a commission or board and explain why they scored a round the way they did. And commissions should start looking towards getting younger judges. I mean Julie Lederman is the youngest one that I have seen.