Boxing

Three Ways Boxing Could (And Should) Evolve - Part 1

11.07.06 - By Chris Santos: If you are reading this on EASTSIDE BOXING's website, chances are you are a knowledgeable boxing fan, probably even "hard-core"--which means you love the sport unconditionally, and thus, are willing to 'look the other way' at some of the sports more frustrating aspects. In this writing I'll focus on three areas (in 3 parts) that I would love to see change in ways that would I think, improve the overall health of the sport.

PART 1)
SCORING OF ROUNDS

The most underutilized tool in the hands of Professional Judges is the 10 point must system. A revised guide in using the system could help avoid most, if not all scoring controversies, which in turn, over time, would result in Boxing being recognized more as a legitimate sport.

I propose that the use of the system be 'widened' so that one can differentiate the winner of the round in a clearer manner--such as a fighter being awarded a 10-8 round in rounds were he hasn't scored a knockdown but is the clear winner in a big way....a round where he has his opponent in a very uncomfortable position and / or hurt most of the round. The following guide illustrates a "wider" scoring system as I'd like to see it:

10-10 rounds: currently discouraged; in new system encouraged in very slow, no action rounds (we always focus on the 12th round in fights that end up super-close, but how many no-action, "feel out " first rounds have decided a fight?) Also used in a round where momentum shifts visibly several times, often dramatically;

10-9 rounds: now given to the winner of the round 98% of the time regardless of how overwhelmingly (or not) he won the round; in new system would be awarded to fighters who gain a clear edge in the round through ring generalship or effective aggressiveness etc; but never have there opponent seriously in trouble or hurt---would indicate an edge for the winner but not in an overwhelming way

10-8 rounds: used now in rounds where one knockdown occurs; in new system would be used automatically in a punishing, dominant round, regardless if a knockdown is scored---would indicate the round was won in a dominating fashion; also used when the result of the round was a closer 10-9, but a flash or off balance knockdown occurred

10-7 rounds: rarely used now except to recognize additional knockdowns; in new system would be the result of a round where a fighter is knocked down, as well being dominated and in trouble most or all of the round

10-6 and below would be for the above condition with multiple knockdowns.....

A system as proposed above would need to be not only implemented, but also be taught and tested to Judges annually. While Boxing seems so resistant to change, these simple scoring changes would positively influence the sport. How many blown decisions would have been saved with this scoring system? Think about it. I welcome any feedback and look forward to every body's thoughts on this subject.

Coming soon: Part 2 : Titles, Sanctioning bodies, The Ring and whose really the champ?
Part 3: the Weight Class debate, and are more divisions actually helping the fighters?

Article posted on 11.07.2006



Bookmark and Share


previous article: Alicia Ashley Takes On North Korea, Michelle Rodriguez, and Chess! An ESB Exclusive

next article: Randy "Tex" Cobb v Earnie Shavers - A "Real" Heavyweight Fight!










If you detect any issues with the legality of this site, problems are always unintentional and will be corrected with notification.
The views and opinions of all writers expressed on Boxing247.com do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Management.
Copyright © 2001- 2015 Boxing247.com - Privacy Policy l Contact