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, 08:36 PM
Post #11


Super Middleweight


Group: Members
Posts: 3,464
Joined: 9-December 04
From: Atlanta
Member No.: 1,309



QUOTE (aTYpicalTYrant @ Apr 24 2013, 09:28 PM) *
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.



Please explain what you mean by "open door for winners via cheating." Using the present system, dont fighters still coast when they think they have it in the bag. Didn't DLH coast because he thought he had it won? It didnt turn out well fo him. However if each round was scored openly, he may have known that he still had work to do.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jack 1000
post Apr 24 2013, 11:16 PM
Post #12


The Consultant


Group: Root Admin
Posts: 9,460
Joined: 2-December 02
Member No.: 14



No boxing problem has or will ever be fixed with open scoring. What needs fixed is greater accountability for judges who render controversial decisions. You also can't compare boxing to other sports where scores are known, such as team sports verses one-on-one combat. It's an apples are oranges scenario. Boxing has very little tradition left. Let's hold on to what we have.

I can't see any way that judging would be made better with open scoring. All you get is the opportunity to see bad scores before the end. If open scoring showed any hope of success it would not have been voted down when it was tried even as far back as the 40's. From the 40's to the present it has been voted own overwhelmingly. This is because the experiments have shown that Open Scoring does not fix bad scoring , I am in no way convinced that closed scoring is broken. Instead, it's the lack of accountability for poor judging that is broken and needs changing, not the scoring system itself.

A five judge panel? UGGHHHH! Don't they have that in the Olympics with the computer scoring and headgear? Olympic boxing is more fucked up and has sunk faster than the Titanic with the computer system and knockdowns counting for no more than clean scores. And if judges can't hit the button in time, the scores don't count. We will see how this changes with the next Olympics with head-gear abolished, and the 10-point must system. Hopefully they will use traditional three judge and closed scoring. Pro boxers will compete for the first time, which I think hurts the integrity and spirit of the Games.

Closed Scoring is like the 10-point must system. It may not be perfect, but its longevity shows it is the best model out there. I will consent to the use of more dominate rounds scored as a 10-8 without a knockdown, and more even rounds scored 10-10. This would produce more realistic scorecards. Currently, the 10-9 model has no distinction between a fighter who barely wins a round 10-9, and a fighter who dominates a round without a knockdown also scored 10-9. And if a round really feels even, why is it wrong to score it 10-10? I do that.

Jack


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mrchitown
post Apr 25 2013, 12:44 AM
Post #13


Light Heavyweight


Group: Members
Posts: 4,817
Joined: 21-July 11
Member No.: 12,858



I've never liked open scoring and I feel it needs to be done away with. I could careless about how it went down in the fight this past weekend. It's just another unnecessary rule in the sport..how can you have open scoring when you haven't even implemented a judge accountability rule? It's issues that need to be fixed withing the scoring system and their just adding shit on top of shit
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mgrover
post Apr 25 2013, 03:32 AM
Post #14


Super Middleweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,064
Joined: 23-May 11
Member No.: 12,366



I DONT LIKE IT. that is all
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aTYpicalTYrant
post Apr 25 2013, 08:21 AM
Post #15


Super Flyweight


Group: Members
Posts: 298
Joined: 1-February 12
From: Keller, Tx
Member No.: 13,480



QUOTE (The Original MrFactor @ Apr 24 2013, 09:36 PM) *
Please explain what you mean by "open door for winners via cheating." Using the present system, dont fighters still coast when they think they have it in the bag. Didn't DLH coast because he thought he had it won? It didnt turn out well fo him. However if each round was scored openly, he may have known that he still had work to do.


That's the point I am making. Thinking and knowing are totally different. There is not much incentive for a fighter way ahead on the scorecards to maintain activiTY in a fight. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word "cheating" but it is still unfair none the less. Not only to the fighters but also to the fans....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cshel86
post Apr 25 2013, 08:39 AM
Post #16


"The Meanest Nice Guy"


Group: Moderators
Posts: 12,287
Joined: 11-May 11
From: Wherever Greatness is Bred
Member No.: 12,050



I'm in the minority here, I voted for unsure.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, open scoring sucks and I hate, BUT there are some other pressing and bun-chapping issues in the sport I'd like to see disappear. Choose one.

There will ALWAYS be bad score cards in boxing...they've seemed to turn a blind eye to it since day one. However, open scoring only seems to be horrible when the Austin Trouts of the world, would much rather pitty-pat and pussyfoot his way through a fight that he KNEW he had a big chance of getting shafted in, had it gone to the cards.

The other kicker with open scoring, is the effect that it takes out of the fight. We all saw it last weekend...why take any chances in the final round, if you already know that you've "won" the fight?

Open scoring wouldn't be such a bad thing if the judges weren't so horrible. Again, there are other things that I'd like to see leave the sport, before open scoring.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cshel86
post Apr 25 2013, 08:54 AM
Post #17


"The Meanest Nice Guy"


Group: Moderators
Posts: 12,287
Joined: 11-May 11
From: Wherever Greatness is Bred
Member No.: 12,050



QUOTE (The Original MrFactor @ Apr 24 2013, 04:32 PM) *
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.

I almost made that mistake during the Eagles/Giants Week 15, when Philly came alllll the way back to beat NY. Classic game!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mgrover
post Apr 25 2013, 12:44 PM
Post #18


Super Middleweight


Group: Moderators
Posts: 3,064
Joined: 23-May 11
Member No.: 12,366



QUOTE (Cshel86 @ Apr 25 2013, 02:39 PM) *
There will ALWAYS be bad score cards in boxing...they've seemed to turn a blind eye to it since day one. However, open scoring only seems to be horrible when the Austin Trouts of the world, would much rather pitty-pat and pussyfoot his way through a fight that he KNEW he had a big chance of getting shafted in, had it gone to the cards.


So what your saying is that fighters should always go for a KO and forget boxing principles just because fear of the cards? I'd rather fix the root of the problem. Fire judges and bring in some fresh meat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
daprofessor
post Apr 25 2013, 01:29 PM
Post #19


Cruiserweight


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



hate is not in my vocabulary...but i do not want or like it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cshel86
post Apr 25 2013, 01:36 PM
Post #20


"The Meanest Nice Guy"


Group: Moderators
Posts: 12,287
Joined: 11-May 11
From: Wherever Greatness is Bred
Member No.: 12,050



QUOTE (mgrover @ Apr 25 2013, 01:44 PM) *
So what your saying is that fighters should always go for a KO and forget boxing principles just because fear of the cards? I'd rather fix the root of the problem. Fire judges and bring in some fresh meat.

Didn't Salido do it? Twice? Didn't JMM just do it, after being shafted 2 or 3 times? I mean sheesh, I know these fighters fight for a living and dont care much about watching other fights, but they should really consider taking pages from other fighters' books.

I cant remember the scores from the first Salido/Lopez fight when the stoppage occurred, but the fix was definitely in for the second fight...before Salido scored yet another TKO.

I agree with firing the judges, but that's in a perfect world. These guys are fighters, and they should take things into their own hands when they have the control to do it (fighting). A judge cant get in there and fight for the favored fighter. A crooked promoter cant get in there and throw a punch for the favored fighter. Only the fighters can do this, but what do they? They leave it in the hands of somebody who hasn't put in ANY hard to compete that night.

Was Trout going balls to wall before he got dropped? Nope. He was boxing, or prepared to box anyway. I understand that neglecting boxing skills can spell "trouble", but being too cautious and naive about the judges scoring it fairly when you're fighting a clear favorite with 38k fans and promoters backing him up, is crazy.

Trout's talk leading up to the fight, told us all that we needed to know. All of that "If this fight is close, they wont give it to me" nonsense, is EXACTLY what happened. From what I understand, Trout's team wanted different judges, but they're request was denied, so he should've known how to approach the fight. NOW, he can talk on and on about how good of a boxer he is, but fact is, he's now in the back seat, he has NO rematch clause, and Canelo is about to land some big money fights.

My first thought is, if some of these guys were as good a boxer as they claimed to be, then they wouldn't be on the "deal with it" end of decisions this often. LOL
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: 23rd April 2014 - 06:37 PM