Something has to change with the boxing scoring system. We see fighters and the public complaining about the scores far too often, writes Tony Jeffries (whose Box ‘N Life podcast is available HERE). This weekend’s huge fight between Canelo Alvarez and Gennady Golovkin was another example of this. Ninety-nine percent of people thought GGG easily won; I personally thought he had done enough to get the decision, but didn’t think it was as easy as everyone was saying.
One judge, Adalaide Byrd, had GGG only winning two of the 12 rounds while another judge had him on top in seven and winning the fight. Now, how can these scores be so far apart?
I get it if it’s only one or two rounds, but this is ridiculous!
I think when this happens, the judge should be sat down and made to watch the fight back from the angle they were watching it with other officials and then explain their reasoning for the scoring.
If all the officials disagree with them, then they should not be allowed to judge again. This should prevent people thinking that palms are being greased.
Judges and the public need to be on the same page on how to judge a fight; we can’t have one judge that judges fighters on defence and counterpunching, while another judge scores on the opposite. They, along with the public, need to be on the same page.
The reason I loved the old amateur scoring system was that it was simple – you hit them and you get a point, they hit you and they get a point.
I would love to see this in the pros where the person who hits the other person more in the round with a clean blow wins the round. They should have that score on the TV screen at all times!
Maybe this is the way, maybe it’s not. Either way, something needs to change. Chances are it will never change, there’s too much politics and too many dinosaurs in boxing
Check out my podcast, where I talk about boxing, fitness and business HERE: