IPB  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Open Scoring: Poll Added!, How Do You Feel About It?
What is Your Take On The WBC's 4th and 8th Round Open Scring Rule?
How Do You Currently Feel About Open Scoring?
I Have Always Hated It [ 13 ] ** [81.25%]
I Have Always Liked It [ 1 ] ** [6.25%]
I Used to Hate It, But Now Like/Am Used To It [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
I Used to Like It, But Now Hate It [ 0 ] ** [0.00%]
I Am Not Sure [ 2 ] ** [12.50%]
Total Votes: 16
Guests cannot vote 
The Original MrF...
post Apr 24 2013, 01:37 PM
Post #1


Super Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 3,457
Joined: 9-December 04
From: Atlanta
Member No.: 1,309



I think many who hate open scoring and the way it was presented in the Canelo/Trout fight may have really hated it because of the horrific scores read in the 8th round. If that score reflected a dead even fight, I dont think there would be as much backlash. I think the score shown after the 8th round that showed Trout trailing badly that pissed everybody off. Many, including Trout(to some degree) thought the fight was pretty much over unless Trout got a KO. Hey, even Stevie Wonder's scorecard had it close after 8.

I think open scoring can be done with success. I think it should be done after each round. I know the crowd may then sway the judges at ringside, just a bit after the scores are read. I also think that maybe there should be 5 Judges. 3 at ringside and 2 in a secluded room with a few monitors watching the fight with no replays or commentary just to balance the sway of the crowd noise. The ringside judges, particularly for this fight may get swayed way too much by the crowd. The secluded judges will see the fight in a more objective way. As it is now, we know judges are only human and dont have the benefit of replay, as we do. So they may see a scoring shot that didnt really score. That was also very evident in Pacquiao/Bradley. I think that happened to the benefit or detriment of both guys in Canelo/Trout.

I think the 8th round score just gave us a preview of what we saw at the end when the scorecards were tallied. The disappointment was the same, just earlier. If they showed the scores after each round, then Trout could have decided to get busier earlier. Of course its going to change the way the guy fights. I dont see anything wrong with that. In football if you are down by 20 points late in the 2nd quarter, you might start passing more. You change your approach to try to score more. In football they dont hold the score until late in the 3rd quarter and you find out the score is 40 to 10. And your team is the one with 10. Outside of some miracle, your not gonna win. Lets the scores be shown after each round. The judges may even be more honest that way.

This post has been edited by Jack 1000: Apr 24 2013, 11:56 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jack 1000
post Apr 24 2013, 02:28 PM
Post #2


The Consultant


Group: Root Admin
Posts: 9,450
Joined: 2-December 02
Member No.: 14



No!

Boxing got along just fine for 50-100 years without open scoring. The same issues show the negatives outweigh the positives:

  • Boxers going into track meets knowing they are ahead
  • Boxers giving up knowing they are behind.
  • Fan's will stop watching when a fight is so one-sided. I stopped scoring, and didn't care anymore with the Alvarez-Trout scores were read. (round 8)
  • Fighters could get a head-butt from an accidental head-butt, know they are ahead on the cards, QUIT AFTER the fourth round-win a technical decision.
  • Judges may be inclined to question thir scores if not in synch with the others.
  • All suspense is lost. Instead of one fight, with closed-scoring, you have a series of four-round mini-fights. Too wired.
  • Crowd security is an issue. There was a riot in a WBC fight in Italy where a champ lost due to Open Scoring.
  • Open Scoring, which is a violation of Unified Rules is not allowed in the USA. Apparently, Texas who uses it has no regard for its own rules.
  • Open Scoring was tried in the 70's-90's failed every time.
  • Most commissions have nullified this WBC rule, exceptions are Japan, Texas, a few regions of Mexico, perhaps a few others.
  • Open Scoring does not make judging account ability better. Instead provide better review for judges with controversial cards after the fight.

The video below that I also put in the Alvarez-Trout Spoiler thread outlines these points, beautifully.

http://fightnetwork.com/news/38070:fn-vide...ng-robbed-fans/

Jack
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Original MrF...
post Apr 24 2013, 03:13 PM
Post #3


Super Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 3,457
Joined: 9-December 04
From: Atlanta
Member No.: 1,309





Boxers going into track meets knowing they are ahead====> Doesnt this happen now? Ask Oscar how that worked out for him.
Boxers giving up knowing they are behind----> Unless you hit like Tim Bradley, the home run is always a possibility. Michael Nunn/James Toney is one that comes to mind.
Fan's will stop watching when a fight is so one-sided. I stopped scoring, and didn't care anymore with the Alvarez-Trout scores were read. (round 8)---I think this changes if the scores are announced after EACH round. Fight plans can get altered after each round. Mosley?Alvarez and Mosley/Pacquiao were that way. After the 7th, we were ready for them to be over.
Fighters could get a head-butt from an accidental head-butt, know they are ahead on the cards, QUIT AFTER the fourth round-win a technical decision.--Rules can be changed to reflect the times. I remember 15 rounders like they were yesterday...
Judges may be inclined to question thir scores if not in synch with the others. ---They do that according to crowd noise, now.
All suspense is lost. Instead of one fight, with closed-scoring, you have a series of four-round mini-fights. Too wired.= It should be after every roud, as in other sports. It would promote better match ups
Crowd security is an issue. There was a riot in a WBC fight in Italy where a champ lost due to Open Scoring.---The risk you run in any sports event. Let the refs make a bad call in the Falcons/Saints rivalry.
Open Scoring, which is a violation of Unified Rules is not allowed in the USA. Apparently, Texas who uses it has no regard for its own rules.----Again, rules and laws can be changed.
Open Scoring was tried in the 70's-90's failed every time. Was it the way I described or every 4 or 5 rounds?
Most commissions have nullified this WBC rule, exceptions are Japan, Texas, a few regions of Mexico, perhaps a few others.[/===It can be un-nullified.
[b]Open Scoring does not make judging account ability better. Instead provide better review for judges with controversial cards after the fight.
------Having 5 judges, 3 ringside and 2 backroom monitor with no commentary, may offset some of the crazy scores we see.

The video below that I also put in the Alvarez-Trout Spoiler thread outlines these points, beautifully.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
daprofessor
post Apr 24 2013, 03:28 PM
Post #4


Cruiserweight


Group: Members
Posts: 5,773
Joined: 20-May 11
From: killa kali
Member No.: 12,336



QUOTE (Jack 1000 @ Apr 24 2013, 03:28 PM) *
No!

Boxing got along just fine for 50-100 years without open scoring. The same issues show the negatives outweigh the positives:

  • Boxers going into track meets knowing they are ahead
  • Boxers giving up knowing they are behind.
  • Fan's will stop watching when a fight is so one-sided. I stopped scoring, and didn't care anymore with the Alvarez-Trout scores were read. (round 8)
  • Fighters could get a head-butt from an accidental head-butt, know they are ahead on the cards, QUIT AFTER the fourth round-win a technical decision.
  • Judges may be inclined to question thir scores if not in synch with the others.
  • All suspense is lost. Instead of one fight, with closed-scoring, you have a series of four-round mini-fights. Too wired.
  • Crowd security is an issue. There was a riot in a WBC fight in Italy where a champ lost due to Open Scoring.
  • Open Scoring, which is a violation of Unified Rules is not allowed in the USA. Apparently, Texas who uses it has no regard for its own rules.
  • Open Scoring was tried in the 70's-90's failed every time.
  • Most commissions have nullified this WBC rule, exceptions are Japan, Texas, a few regions of Mexico, perhaps a few others.
  • Open Scoring does not make judging account ability better. Instead provide better review for judges with controversial cards after the fight.

The video below that I also put in the Alvarez-Trout Spoiler thread outlines these points, beautifully.

http://fightnetwork.com/news/38070:fn-vide...ng-robbed-fans/

Jack


this.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Original MrF...
post Apr 24 2013, 03:32 PM
Post #5


Super Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 3,457
Joined: 9-December 04
From: Atlanta
Member No.: 1,309



Do people stop watching football games that are blowouts at the end of the 3rd quarter? Of course they do. In football, basketball and baseball, there isnt a home run that can make up for huge point deficits. Boxing has that. You can still get knocked out with 1 second to go in the 12th round. Ala Mosley/Mayorga.

If the Saints are down 50-0 to the Falcons at the 2minute warning in the 2nd half, there's no coming back. In boxing there can always be a KO. I think open scoring after each round will work.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BrutUalBK
post Apr 24 2013, 03:45 PM
Post #6


Lightweight


Group: Members
Posts: 948
Joined: 20-June 12
From: Texas
Member No.: 13,708



QUOTE (Jack 1000 @ Apr 24 2013, 02:28 PM) *
No!

Boxing got along just fine for 50-100 years without open scoring. The same issues show the negatives outweigh the positives:

  • Boxers going into track meets knowing they are ahead
  • Boxers giving up knowing they are behind.
  • Fan's will stop watching when a fight is so one-sided. I stopped scoring, and didn't care anymore with the Alvarez-Trout scores were read. (round 8)
  • Fighters could get a head-butt from an accidental head-butt, know they are ahead on the cards, QUIT AFTER the fourth round-win a technical decision.
  • Judges may be inclined to question thir scores if not in synch with the others.
  • All suspense is lost. Instead of one fight, with closed-scoring, you have a series of four-round mini-fights. Too wired.
  • Crowd security is an issue. There was a riot in a WBC fight in Italy where a champ lost due to Open Scoring.
  • Open Scoring, which is a violation of Unified Rules is not allowed in the USA. Apparently, Texas who uses it has no regard for its own rules.
  • Open Scoring was tried in the 70's-90's failed every time.
  • Most commissions have nullified this WBC rule, exceptions are Japan, Texas, a few regions of Mexico, perhaps a few others.
  • Open Scoring does not make judging account ability better. Instead provide better review for judges with controversial cards after the fight.

The video below that I also put in the Alvarez-Trout Spoiler thread outlines these points, beautifully.

http://fightnetwork.com/news/38070:fn-vide...ng-robbed-fans/

Jack



I agree with Jack, why try and fix something that isn't broken. We were far better off without knowing the scores until after the fight was done...despite the recent pisspoor job done in the Canelo vs Trout fight especially by Stanley Christoudolou i still liked it the way it was.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Amandla
post Apr 24 2013, 06:22 PM
Post #7


Flyweight


Group: Members
Posts: 189
Joined: 15-September 12
Member No.: 13,750



I think its an all around thumbs DOWN for open scoring. Stick it in the bin.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mikE11
post Apr 24 2013, 07:59 PM
Post #8


Amateur


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 23-December 12
Member No.: 13,807



It doesn't really need to be debated.

If you haven't seen open scoring, but have seen maybe 10 distance fights, you can figure out that it would suck.

If you have seen open scoring in practice, you would know it sucks worse than you suspected it would.

Exceptions don't change the rule, they prove the rule.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Plah
post Apr 24 2013, 08:06 PM
Post #9


Super Bantamweight


Group: Members
Posts: 495
Joined: 25-June 11
Member No.: 12,629



Am I the only one with Factor here? I think it should be after each round. Fighters quitting because they are behind are just that, quitters. They aren't going to accomplish much in the sport anyways. I also liked the idea of having extra judges watching and scoring from different angles. And how dare everybody say that the way the fights are scored now isn't broken? (Well not the way but the people really).

This post has been edited by Plah: Apr 24 2013, 08:09 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aTYpicalTYrant
post Apr 24 2013, 08:28 PM
Post #10


Super Flyweight


Group: Members
Posts: 297
Joined: 1-February 12
From: Keller, Tx
Member No.: 13,480



QUOTE (Plah @ Apr 24 2013, 09:06 PM) *
Am I the only one with Factor here? I think it should be after each round. Fighters quitting because they are behind are just that, quitters. They aren't going to accomplish much in the sport anyways. I also liked the idea of having extra judges watching and scoring from different angles. And how dare everybody say that the way the fights are scored now isn't broken? (Well not the way but the people really).


I think you are.... Even if the scoring was done after every round it still isn't guaranteed to prevent the issues expressed by @Jack earlier. It also could open the doors for winners via cheating. Can't it? It's safe to say that both fighters should be playing to WIN at ALL TIMES! That need is removed with Open Scoring. I honestly believe open scoring could/would prove to be a hindrance rather than not. I do like your idea of judges watching the fights from different angles though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th April 2014 - 08:21 AM