It's absolutely ruined as a spectator sport imho.
I watch a share of boxing, probably more than the average person who was supporting "the lads" over the last few weeks and I find myself scratching my head looking at it.
The new judging system means that the points don't come up on screen as you're watching it destroying it for casual viewers. You're always second guessing yourself as I found most of the time I was wrong on who had won what round. Few examples that stick out in my mind:
I thought when it was a draw Paddy Barnes would have beaten the Chinese lad on the decision. Sure he walked on to a few silly punches but in the last round and a half he was doing all the fighting chasing your man around the ring.
I thought Katie Taylor was in serious, serious trouble against the Russian but it turned out she had won handy!
I remember seeing a black lad boxing for Britain (Junior something??) The Ukranian he was fighting basically Ivan Dragoed him for the last round holding him up with one hand and punching him with the other. But the British fella got the decision?!
There's others but that's enough to be getting on with. I watched a lot less boxing than I normally would because I just found it frustrating not really knowing what's going on.
Is it gone really, really subjective and bitty??
Or do I just not have a clue??
Nope.
You like me had then same issues. I think the lack of a consistent scoring for spectators to see is annoying. But to be honest I reckon I was always within one point of each decision. I still think Barnes should have won that.
The other disgrace of the games I thought, and it seems it wasn't really reported on was Anthony Ogogo fight v Ievgen Khytrov
http://www.london2012.com/boxing/eve...401/index.html
How Ogogo got this decision was a scandal.
Last edited by BonnieShels; 13/08/2012 at 1:45 PM. Reason: won is not one
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
This isn't possible under the new scoring system. After a round, only 3 of the 5 judges' scores are counted and then averaged. This is to counter bribery - any bribed judges are more likely to have 'extreme' scores and the two most extreme scores are excluded for each round. But this can't be calculated until the end of each round.Originally Posted by Lim till i die
On the rest of it - the main problem, as outlined by Spudulika in the main olympic thread, is that the criteria for scoring don't cover all the skills in boxing. All that counts is a clean shot. The ability to slip a punch, corner an opponent with footwork etc are not counted. Putting pressure with a series of punches leading up to a clean scoring punch doesn't count. Agression doesn't count.
This is why there is a liklihood that from the next olympics, the 'professional' scoring system of 10-9 rounds will be brought in. I hope so anyway.
But doesn't that bring in the bribery problems again ?
I'm not sure I agree with that, even though I know you know a hell of a lot more about boxing than I do but a few questions; - isn't the abilty to slip a punch vital in not conceeding points?, good footwork is essential to provide a platform to score and defend?, doesn't a series of punches and agression help in tiring your opponent out thus making it easier to score later in the contest?
I agree the system isn't ideal - but isn't it better than the professional system with can be riddled with poor decisions and bias.
I also think its better than the previous method as that started turning into a game of tag your opponent.
I enjoyed the boxing over the past two weeks - I am going to sit down and watch some more sessions on the bbc players this evening because I missed most of the finals over the weekend. It is so much better than the pro game now.
I'd love to see some real private investment in boxing to keep these people in the amateur game rather than going pro.
Did you misread my post? I agree with you - all those things are important and should count, but my point is that none of them count under the current system.
True, point taken, but it will come down to finding reliable judges no matter what system there is. Reliable judges combined with criteria that cover all the skills in the ring, hopefully.
Yeah that was the fight that showed up how bad the present system is. Couldnt believe that Ogogo won that fight, and it says a lot that in the next round he was put down twice by a Brazilian. Barnes decision was a joke as well, as the Chinese fighter was just dancing for the last two rounds.
Bringing in the professional scoring will help, and also should just use judges from Europe and the Americas -a joke to have judges from India and the like scoring finals and semis
No I didn't mis-read your post - I'm arguing that while they don't directly get you points you still need those attributes to avoid conceeding ( same a scoring if you ask me) and to help you in scoring.
I've yet to see anyone in amateur boxing score cleanly and consistantly while his feet are stuck underneath him/her for example. A lot of times in this olympics I have seen the more aggressive fighter score more heavily in the 3rd round as his opponent tires (Barnes/Zou a good example).
You may not get points for the basics - but you need the basics to help get you points - I don't see how the points system hinders the development of these qualities.
RAM - boxers are awarded for landing what is deemed, by 3 of 5 judges, what they believe is a clean punch, which is often dictated by the contemporaneous roar of the crowd (Beijing was a prime example of that, it's practice in the Orient that the crowd roars each punch, except in Japan where they clap, Osarusan can correct me on that). The current system goes against quality boxing and reduces boxers to glorified robots and skills inherent in boxing (as outlined by Osarusan) are not counted.
I can give one very good example of a pro fighter who made a good living and was successful by involving the true skills of boxing - Manning Galloway. Many times he lost decisions because the home crowd roared the judges into fear of voting against the home draw.
Basics are nothing if you're not rewarded and if you don't punch hard enough to make your opponents scoring area (front torso and head) react, then you won't be rewarded under the current system.
I'm glad they dropped the live scoring from the screen as they boxed, I just couldn't handle watching both the boxing and the scoring.
I missed it only when it was mentioned by a panel member, maybe I'm too old school, but it always struck me as the way Fox tried to sell ice hockey to the yanks by having a blue or red trail from the puck.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks