Judging - What is it good for

The last month or so has seen Judging, once again come under scrutiny and for the call to once again be shouted that something needs to change (It quickly goes away again but it’s a constant that’s there.)

After arguing with my peers on what constitutes a good judge and what scores should be based on, I’ve come to the conclusion that none of us actually have a clue. It’s very difficult to find it written down by any of the organisations (other than AIBA) on what they consider the general scoring criteria and what they prefer to see, so it’s left open to interpretation. Now normally I’d say that this is a good thing, as some of us prefer defensive work, some of us aggressiveness and others on generalities like work rate, style over substance etc. Alas this ‘interpretation’ has led to some ludicrous score lines, (the obvious being Canelo/GGG (I had Canelo by one, but couldn’t argue with GGG, I will argue with that 118 scorecard though, I’ve also seen a shocking decision in Germany and well, look and you’ll spot some too.)

A close card can always be argued for and against the boxer you prefer but some of these score lines have taken the sport into joke territory, and with the Alvarez one, had a real chance to put boxing back on the front pages legitimately after Maysomebody against Connors someat or other dominated for the last few months. Alas it was on the front pages but for all the wrong reasons and once again fans were asking themselves is it worth putting all this time and effort into something that seemingly isn’t as straightforward as it should be.

Continued at
https://topclassboxing.co.uk/2017/10/18/judging-what-is-it-good-for-ummm-were-not-sure/