I have just found out that the Association of Boxing Commissions has vetoed Open Scoring for it's Unified Rules, which almost all US jurisdictions abide by, through a vote of 32-1. Only Arkansas last month voted in favor of Open Scoring, which was put to use as an experimental measure by its commission in last December's Taylor-Ouma WBC/WBO Middleweight title fight. Much of the reasoning for this decision was based on what we have talked about on the forum:
The loss of suspense of not knowing the decision
Fighters coasting to protect their leads. (Witness Mormeck-Bell II)
Cornermen stopping fights knowing that the boxer they manage can no longer win. (Witness Cotto-Urkal)
Around the time of Lewis-Holyfield I, boxing fans will remember that their was such a strong outcry against the decision that several different scoring systems were tried. (all failed.) An excellent article from the past reviews why this system will NEVER, EVER, WORK:
But AP writer Jim Litke is reporting that Don King is pushing for Open Scoring for the planned Jones-Trinidad fight:
It is doubtful that this will pass. In it's best light, the gags, gimmicks, and cons associated with any form of open scoring would never solve the crux of the matter. Boxing doesn't need open scoring, it needs the most qualified judges with the greatest experience and integrity to work the fights. The Association of Boxing Commissions already has an ongoing database of the judges that its jurisdictions use for fights. Patterns of positive judging, rewarding the behavior of good judging, and establishing consistency and uniformity for officials give boxing its best chance of fairness and impartiality.