These 3 would sit on opposite sides during the fights and would judge the fight while they occur and if the actual results stray to far from the truth (a huge robbery) this committee will meet up with the people running the super 6 and decide if the fight should be over ruled.... the actual idea of this tournament is so great that it should be treated properly with no bumps in the road to ensure it gets proper press and it sets a good example for the rest of the boxing community and the future...
there should be like 2 or 3 sets of back up judges (3 judges per set) and if the fight goes into deliberation (a ridiculous ass robbery when fighting away) they will randomly take one of the judges sets and go with that..... or something like that
It would be the same. If 3 judges give a young, undefeated fighter the decision over an older fighter who already has a few losses, so will the "back-up" judges. It's just the way all judges operate. Look at Dawson-Johnson, McDermott-Fury, Taylor-Wright, Pavlik-Taylor, and the list could continue forever. And in the case of hometown decisions, if the German mafia can buy 3 judges, they can buy 6.
Nice idea in theory, but endless problems in reality. What constitutes a robbery and why would one set of judges be more qualified than the other? Surely the best man for the job should be sitting at ringside rather than scoring the scorers? And who regulates this backup board? Robberies are few and far between but part and parcel of the sport. Unfortunately.
Who would decide whether a 'huge robbery' had occured or merely a decision that could have been seen another way? Would there be another panel to make that decision?
I agree. This is why this is difficult. Different judges see fights differently. How about increasing the number of judges from 3 to 5? Split decisions etc could still occur but the margin of error would be cut down in my opinion.
They should have neutral judges for each fight anyway. There should be no hometown judges for any fight. And they should be able to get some experienced judges so we could get some decisions we can trust. I don't think adding more judges would be a solution, but surely we could get some good judges organised for this.
They should just develop a board of professional judges for all title fights, just like they have pro refs in the NBA. That doesn't keep some refs from being bad or corrupt, but most of the time the officiating is ok.
Bearing in mind the fact that many ESB users class a close fight as a robbery I doubt it would work. Who is watching the watchers of the watchers of the watchers?
