Featured Articles
Open Scoring in Boxing: Yes or No? Part Two of a TSS Survey
(PART TWO: M-W): We asked 48 noted boxing buffs how they felt about open scoring. Specifically we asked, “Are you in favor of open scoring whereby the scores of the judges would be revealed after each round or at one or more intervals during the fight? If so, why? If not, why not?”
The respondents are listed alphabetically. Part One (A-L) ran yesterday (Tuesday, Oct. 2). Here’s the concluding segment. A hearty thanks to all that took the time to share their thoughts.
ADEYINKA MAKINDE—U.K. barrister, writer and contributor to the forthcoming Cambridge Companion to Boxing. Open scoring would detract from the drama of what the final decision will be should the fight endure to the allocated distance. So entertainment wise, it is not of particular value. Neither is its value enhanced in so far as the notion that it might improve the quality of judging. After all, the idea surely is not to put pressure on a judge whose scoring appears off base to a section of the crowd, or to substitute judges mid-fight for “getting things wrong.” This is a non-issue. Instead the focus should be on determining the professional competence of judges as well as their integrity.
JOHN McKALE–prominent boxing judge: No, 100% not in favor. The mind through the eyes of each judge should not be compromised by anything, including what the other judges may be determining.
PAUL MAGNO–author, writer and boxing official in Mexico: I don’t like open scoring. It does absolutely nothing to help the integrity of judging, but it ruins some key elements of intrigue and suspense when it comes to the fight and the announcing of a winner. If boxing is serious about judging reform, then they need to do the only thing that matters– overhaul the entire incestuous system and create more of a separation between the promoters and the selection of officials.
SCOOP MALINOWSKI—boxing writer, author, “Mr. Biofile”: Open scoring is just another system that can be corrupted and surely will be corrupted. I’d rather see former pro boxers and champions in the role as judges, but they can be corrupted too.
LARRY MERCHANT—HBO boxing commentator emeritus; 2009 IBHOF inductee: I’m opposed to open scoring because I witnessed a couple of such experiments that fell flat. Either the winning fighter, knowing the score, coasted through the late rounds and/or the losing fighter failed to respond, accepting defeat. The drama of uncertainty works best in prize fighting.
ROBERT MLADINICH — former NYPD police detective, author and boxing writer: I am not in favor of open scoring because awaiting a close decision is much of the fun of a good, close fight. Unfortunately the judges often get it wrong, which ruins the entire experience. That does not justify the open scoring. There should just be better judges.
HARRY OTTY—author, historian, part-time boxing coach: Absolutely in favor of ‘open scoring.’ How many close fights may have had a different result if the corner that felt they were ahead knew, without doubt, that they were actually behind with a couple of rounds left in the fight? I have coached amateur boxers for over 30 years and the closed scoring sucks – corruption is also rife. The best period we had was when the computer scoring (a button-push for each punch landed – not an ideal set up) was revealed at the end of each round. If you lost the first of three you at least had the option to alter tactics. Boxers/coaches who can adapt to what is happening as a result of the known score would also be proving their skill/superiority in the ring. TACTICS! From an open and transparent perspective it may have the side effect of making all judges (promoters/governing bodies) more accountable.
MARY ANN LURIE OWEN–boxing photojournalist extraordinaire: In 12-round title fights, scores should be announced after the 4th and 8th rounds.
JOE PASQUALE – prominent judge and recent NJ Boxing Hall of Fame inductee: As a fan, my thoughts are that this is the one sport that holds the suspense of the outcome until the third judge’s score is read by the ring announcer. Also, I have worked a few of these score progressions announced throughout the fight. The fighter with the big lead going into the later rounds just stopped engaging and coasted the last few rounds, taking the edge off a good fight with the possibility of a stoppage going into that tough 12th round.
DAVID PAYNE—U.K. boxing writer: I’m not in favor. Open scoring impacts intent of fighters and crowd reaction impacts officials.
J. RUSSELL PELTZ—venerable Philadelphia boxing promoter and 2004 IBHOF inductee: Terrible idea. A boxer with a big lead avoids contact down the stretch. Takes away suspense. Better solution is to get better judges.
ADAM POLLACK–author, publisher, and boxing official: There are pros and cons. The pro is it would allow the fighter who was behind to make adjustments and potentially fight harder, because it would make him realize that what he was doing was not as effective in the judges’ minds as he thought it was. On the other hand, it can allow one fighter to coast if he realizes he is well ahead, which can cause fights to become boring, and it eliminates the drama. When neither knows whether or not they are ahead, they fight harder, fearing the unknown. But what boxing really should do is stop using incompetent judges, and bring back the 15-round championship fight. Open scoring simply shows the fighters and the world how terrible the judging is as it is happening. It doesn’t change the fact of bad judging.
BRIAN POWERS–former fighter: Show them so the fighter knows and can turn it up if he’s behind.
JACQUIE RICHARDSON–Executive Director, Retired Boxers Foundation: I fail to see what difference that would make. Good judges will be good judges and bad judges will remain bad judges. The only positive outcome would be if the corners know, and the boxers come out and make adjustments to more convincingly win rounds. Another positive thing would be to see if the judges know what ring generalship is and the real difference between power shots and pity-pats.
CLIFF ROLD—boxing writer; founding member of the Transnational Boxing Rankings Board: I’m not in favor of open scoring of any kind/time. I think it changes the approach of fighters and those with leads have an impetus to disengage. That’s bad for the entertainment factor. The second Bell-Mormeck fight at cruiserweight soured me on it. It went from eight rounds of all-out war to a chase scene.
FREDERICK ROMANO–former ESPN researcher and author: My general feeling is I don’t believe it is necessary. It cuts both ways. Knowing a fight is dead even going into the last round could lead to some supreme efforts. It also might result in over-caution. However, I would like to hear from the fighters themselves as to whether they are in favor of it. Would they find it beneficial from a strategic standpoint? If they do, maybe we need to depart from tradition. I think what might be more important is that we improve the quality of judging. With quality judging the need for open scoring is mitigated. Also, using five judges for championship bouts might be helpful to reduce the potential impact of corruption and would overcome even two poor scorecards, saving some bouts from the wrong result.
DANA ROSENBLATT–former world middleweight champion; inspirational speaker: I am not in favor of open scoring. Although potential corruption is shrouded in part by allowing scoring to be done in a way that no one knows until the fight is over, I am not in favor of it. Instead, how about mandating that judges for all boxing matches are selected exclusively by the state boxing commissions of the states where the matches take place and not the promoters? I think this would make a difference.
LEE SAMUELS–veteran Top Rank publicist: We wouldn’t change it. There is always suspense how a fight is being scored. And in today’s world of Twitter, the top ringside writers tweet how they are scoring – that is good enough for me and for the fans who are watching.
TED SARES–TSS writer: In general, I dislike the concept but I’d be willing to see how allowing the scores to be read at the end of three rounds in ten-round fights and at the end of four in 12-round fights would work out—on a six-month trial basis.
ICEMAN JOHN SCULLY—former boxer, trainer, commentator, he’s done it all: There is no way open scoring should be allowed. It would kill all the potential for great drama in the sport of boxing. If it were implemented, it would backfire catastrophically.
MICHAEL SILVER–author, historian: I think it warrants an experiment for several months and in all fights to see how open scoring affects the fighters, corner men and fans in the arena. Mixed feelings about it but worth a try and then evaluate.
ALLAN SWYER–documentary filmmaker, writer, and producer of the acclaimed El Boxeo:Remember Oscar dancing away rounds because he knew he was far ahead in points? We’ll see far more of that kind of behavior with open scoring. My answer is a resounding NO!
DONALD L. TRELLA–prominent boxing judge: I am not a proponent of open scoring. I think part of the excitement that is generated by boxing is the announcement of the winner at the end of the fight. Everyone is on edge and anxious to hear the scores. There are also many ways a fighter can use open scoring to their advantage and diminish the action. For example, if a fighter is way ahead after seven rounds and has a shutout going, what’s the benefit of mixing it up the rest of the way? The fighter in the lead could just dance and stay out of the fray for the remaining five rounds leading to a very boring bout. Another example might be where a fighter is injured by an accidental foul. After four rounds are completed and he knows he’s ahead, he may say he can’t continue due to the injury and win the fight knowing what the score is after 4 rounds. What if a judge realizes he is wide compared to the other judges, does he start to score rounds differently to bring his or her scoring more in line with the other two judges? Very little upside… lots of down side. I actually could go on and on with a lot of examples.
GARY “DIGITAL” WILLIAMS— the voice of “Boxing on the Beltway”: I am totally against open scoring. This takes the excitement of wondering what the final judge’s score will be. Back in April of 1999, there was the Triple Jeopardy card in DC where they tried three types of open scoring — announcing the score after four rounds, after six rounds and after every round. Mark Johnson’s bout was the one tried after every round. After the bout, Mark told me that he knew after about eight rounds that he was well ahead on points so he just coasted to the win. Fans did not get a chance to see his true greatness. Open scoring just does not work on any level.
BEAU WILLIFORD–former trainer and the glue of boxing in Cajun Country: I favor open scoring either way. I think open scoring would provide better boxing matches!
PETER WOOD–former fighter, writer,author: I’m all for the transparency of open scoring, but it wouldn’t work the way we would like. A boxing match’s emotionally-charged environment can be dangerous—and VERY dangerous to a judge who doesn’t score a round like the crowd wants it to be scored. The masses are asses and judges would be too easily influenced and swayed for their own safety
OBSERVATIONS:
Those opposed to Open Scoring overwhelmed those for it by a margin of 40-9. Jim Lampley said he was against it because it kills suspense for fans, places fighters at risk if they fall behind and then take risks not warranted by their abilities, while conversely encouraging a leading fighter to take fewer risks — and risk is at the heart of the sport. Larry Merchant added that he had witnessed a couple of such experiments that fell flat. Either the winning fighter, knowing the score, coasted through the late rounds and/or the losing fighter failed to respond, accepting defeat. The drama of uncertainty works best in prize fighting. J. Russell Peltz, in common with several other respondents, said a better solution is to get better judges. Another frequently-heard comment was pinpointed colorfully by Peter Wood: “A boxing match’s emotionally-charged environment can be dangerous—and VERY dangerous to a judge who doesn’t score a round like the crowd wants it to be scored.” And Steve Farhood summed things up nicely by stating, “..it places undue pressure on the judges and eliminates one of the most dramatic moments in boxing–when the ring announcer reads the final scores in a close fight.”
Some of those in favor, such as Bill Caplan and Mary Ann Owen, favored the WBC plan of open scoring during intervals, rather than after every round. And others thought there would be value in trying it for a trial period.
Ted Sares is one of the oldest active power lifters and is the oldest Strongman competitor in the United States. He recently won the Maine State Championship in his class. He is a member of Ring 4 and its Boxing Hall of Fame.
Photo: Julio Cesar Chavez and Pernell Whitaker battle to a controversial draw in San Antonio.
Check out more boxing news on video at The Boxing Channel
Featured Articles
The Ortiz-Bohachuk Thriller has been named the TSS 2024 Fight of The Year
The Aug. 10 match in Las Vegas between Knockout artists Vergil Ortiz Jr and Serhii Bohachuk seemingly had scant chance of lasting the 12-round distance. Ortiz, the pride of Grand Prairie, Texas, was undefeated in 21 fights with 20 KOs. Bohachuk, the LA-based Ukrainian, brought a 24-1 record with 23 knockouts.
In a surprise, the fight went the full 12. And it was a doozy.
The first round, conventionally a feeling-out round, but was anything but. “From the opening bell, [they] clobbered each other like those circus piledriver hammer displays,” wrote TSS ringside reporter David A. Avila.
In this opening frame, Bohachuk, the underdog in the betting, put Ortiz on the canvas with a counter left hook. Of the nature of a flash knockdown, it was initially ruled a slip by referee Harvey Dock. With the benefit of instant replay, the Nevada State Athletic Commission overruled Dock and after four rounds had elapsed, the round was retroactively scored 10-8.
Bohachuk had Ortiz on the canvas again in round eight, put there by another left hook. Ortiz was up in a jiff, but there was no arguing it was a legitimate knockdown and it was plain that Ortiz now trailed on the scorecards.
Aware of the situation, the Texan, a protégé of the noted trainer Robert Garcia, dug deep to sweep the last four rounds. But these rounds were fused with drama. “Every time it seemed the Ukrainian was about to fall,” wrote Avila, “Bohachuk would connect with one of those long right crosses.”
In the end, Ortiz eked out a majority decision. The scores were 114-112 x2 and 113-113.
Citing the constant adjustments and incredible recuperative powers of both contestants, CBS sports combat journalist Brian Campbell called the fight an instant classic. He might have also mentioned the unflagging vigor exhibited by both. According to CompuBox, Ortiz and Bohachuk threw 1579 punches combined, landing 490, numbers that were significantly higher than the early favorite for Fight of the Year, the March 2 rip-snorter at Verona, New York between featherweights Raymond Ford and Otabek Kholmatov (a win for Ford who pulled the fight out of the fire in the final minute).
Photo credit: Al Applerose
To comment on this story in the Fight Forum CLICK HERE
Featured Articles
Women’s Prizefighting Year End Review: The Best of the Best in 2024
Women’s Prizefighting Year End Review: The Best of the Best in 2024
It’s the end of the year.
Here are our awards for the best in women’s boxing. But first, a rundown on the state of the sport.
Maybe its my imagination but it seems that fewer female fights of magnitude took place in 2024 than in previous years.
A few promoters like 360 Promotions increased their involvement in women’s boxing while others such as Matchroom Boxing and Golden Boy Promotions seem stagnant. They are still staging female bouts but are not signing new additions.
American-based promotion company Top Rank, actually lost 50 percent of their female fighter roster when Seniesa Estrada, the undisputed minimumweight champion, retired recently. They still have Mikaela Mayer.
A promotion company making headlines and creating sparks in the boxing world is Most Valuable Promotions led by Jake Paul and Nakisa Bidarian. They signed Amanda Serrano and have invested in staging other female fights
This year, the top streaming company Netflix gambled on sponsoring Jake Paul versus Mike Tyson, along with Amanda Serrano versus Katie Taylor and hit a monster home run. According to Netflix metrics an estimated 74 million viewers watched the event that took place on Nov. 16 at Arlington, Texas.
“Breaking records like this is exactly what MVP was built to do – bring the biggest, most electrifying events to fans worldwide,” said Nakisa Bidarian co-founder of MVP.
History was made in viewership and at the gate where more than 70,000 fans packed AT&T Stadium for a record-setting $17.8 million in ticket sales outside of Las Vegas. It was the grand finale moment of the year.
Here are the major contributors to women’s boxing in 2024.
Fighter of the Year: Amanda Serrano
Other candidates: Katie Taylor, Claressa Shields, Franchon Crews, Dina Thorslund, and Yesica Nery Plata.
Amanda Serrano was chosen for not only taking part in the most viewed female title fight in history, but also for willingly sacrificing the health of her eye after suffering a massive cut during her brutal war with Taylor. She could have quit, walked away with tons of money and be given the technical decision after four rounds. She was ahead on the scorecards at that moment.
Instead, Serrano took more punches, more head butts and slugged her way through 10 magnificent and brilliant rounds against the great Taylor. Fans worldwide were captivated by their performance. Many women who had never watched a female fight were mesmerized and inspired.
Serrano once again proved that she would die in the ring rather than quit. Women and men were awed by her performance and grit. It was a moment blazed in the memories of millions.
Amanda Serrano is the Fighter of the Year.
Best Fight of the Year – Amanda Serrano versus Katie Taylor 2
Their first fight that took place two years ago in Madison Square Garden was the greatest female fight I had ever witnessed. The second fight surpassed it.
When you have two of the best warriors in the world willing to showcase their talent for entertainment regardless of the outcome, it’s like rubbing two sticks of dynamite together.
Serrano jumped on Taylor immediately and for about 20 seconds it looked like the Irish fighter would not make the end of the first round. Not quite. Taylor rallied behind her stubborn determination and pulled out every tool in her possession: elbows, head butts, low blows, whatever was needed to survive, Taylor used.
It reminded me of an old world title fight in 2005 between Jose Luis Castillo a master of fighting dirty and Julio Diaz. I asked about the dirty tactics by Castillo and Diaz simply said, “It’s a fight. It’s not chess. You do what you have to do.”
Taylor did what she had to do to win and the world saw a magnificent fight.
Other candidates: Seniesa Estrada versus Yokasta Valle, Mikaela Mayer versus Sandy Ryan, and Ginny Fuchs vs Adelaida Ruiz.
KO of the Year – Lauren Price KO3 Bexcy Mateus.
Dec. 14, in Liverpool, England.
The IBO welterweight titlist lowered the boom on Bexcy Mateus sending her to the floor thrice. She ended the fight with a one-two combination that left Mateus frozen while standing along the ropes. Another left cross rocket blasted her to the ground. Devastating.
Other candidates: Claressa Shields KO of Vanessa LePage-Joanisse, Gabriela Fundora KO of Gabriela Alaniz, Dina Thorslund vs Mary Romero, Amanda Serrano KO of Stevie Morgan.
Pro’s Pro Award – Jessica Camara
Jessica Camara defeated Hyun Mi Choi in South Korea to win the WBA gold title on April 27, 2024. The match took place in Suwon where Canada’s Camara defeated Choi by split decision after 10 rounds.
Camara, who is managed by Brian Cohen, has fought numerous champions including Kali Reis, Heather Hardy and Melissa St. Vil. She has become a pro fighter that you know will be involved in a good and entertaining fight and is always in search of elite competition. She eagerly accepted the fight in South Korea against Choi. Few fighters are willing to do that.
Next up for Camara is WBC titlist Caroline Dubois set for Jan. 11, in Sheffield, England.
Electric Fighters Club
These are women who never fail to provide excitement and drama when they step in the prize ring. When you only have two-minute rounds there’s no time to run around the boxing ring.
Here are some of the fighters that take advantage of every second and they do it with skill:
Gabriela Fundora, Mizuki Hiruta, Ellie Scotney, Lauren Price, Clara Lescurat, Adelaida Ruiz, Ginny Fuchs, Mikaela Mayer, Yokasta Valle, Sandy Ryan, Chantelle Cameron, Ebanie Bridges, Tsunami Tenkai, Dina Thorslund, Evelin Bermudez, Gabriela Alaniz, Caroline Dubois, Beatriz Ferreira, and LeAnna Cruz.
Claressa Shields Movie and More
A motion picture based on Claressa Shields titled “The Fire Inside” debuts on Wednesday, Dec. 25, nationwide. Most boxing fans know that Shields has world titles in various weight divisions. But they don’t know about her childhood and how she rose to fame.
Also, Shields (15-0, 3 KOs) will be fighting Danielle Perkins (5-0, 2 KOs) for the undisputed heavyweight world championship on Sunday Feb. 2, at Dort Financial Center in Flint, Michigan. DAZN will stream the Salita Promotions fight card.
“Claressa Shields is shining a spotlight on Flint – first on the big screen and then in the ring on Sunday, February 2,” said event promoter Dmitriy Salita, president of Salita Promotions. “Claressa leads by example. She is a trailblazer and has been an advocate for equality since she was a young lady. This event promises to be one of the most significant sporting and cultural events of the year. You don’t want to miss it, either live, in person or live on DAZN.”
Shields is only 29 years old and turns 30 next March. What more can she accomplish?
To comment on this story in the Fight Forum CLICK HERE
Featured Articles
Lucas Bahdi Forged the TSS 2024 Knockout of the Year
A Knockout of the Year doesn’t have to be a one-punch knockout, but it must arrive with the suddenness of a thunderclap on a clear day and the punch or punches must be so harsh as to obviate the need for a “10-count.” And, if rendered by an underdog, that makes the KO resonate more loudly.
Within these parameters, Lucas Bahdi’s knockout of Ashton “H2O” Sylva still jumped off the page. The thunderclap happened on July 20 in Tampa, Florida, on a show promoted by Jake Paul with Paul and the great Amanda Serrano sharing the bill against soft opponents in the featured bouts.
The 30-year-old Bahdi (16-0, 14 KOs) and the 20-year-old Sylva (11-0, 9 KOs) were both undefeated, but Bahdi was accorded scant chance of defeating Jake Paul’s house fighter.
Sylva was 18 years old and had seven pro fights under his belt, winning all inside the distance, when he signed with Paul’s company, Most Valuable Promotions, in 2022. “We believe that Ashton has that talent, that flashiness, that style, that knockout power, that charisma to really be a massive, massive, superstar…” said the “Problem Child” when announcing that Sylva had signed with his company.
Jake Paul was so confident that his protege would accomplish big things that he matched Sylva with Floyd “Kid Austin” Schofield. Currently 18-0 and ranked #2 by the WBA, Schofield was further along than Sylva in the pantheon of hot lightweight prospects. But Schofield backed out, alleging an injury, opening the door to a substitute.
Enter Lucas Bahdi who despite his eye-catching record was a virtual unknown. This would be his first outing on U.S. soil. All of his previous bouts were staged in Mexico or in Canada, mostly in his native Ontario province. “My opponent may have changed,” said Sylva who hails from Long Beach, California, “but the result will be the same, I will get the W and continue my path to greatness.”
The first five rounds were all Sylva. The Canadian had no antidote for Sylva’s speed and quickness. He was outclassed.
Then, in round six, it all came unglued for the precocious California. Out of the blue, Bahdi stiffened him with a hard right hand. Another right quickly followed, knocking Sylva unconscious. A third punch, a sweeping left, was superfluous. Jake Paul’s phenom was already out cold.
Sylva landed face-first on the canvas. He lay still as his handlers and medics rushed to his aid. It was scarifying. “May God restore him,” said ring announcer Joe Martinez as he was being stretchered out of the ring.
The good news is that Ashton “H2O” Silva will be able to resume his career. He is expected back in the ring as early as February. As for Lucas Bahdi, architect of the Knockout of the Year, he has added one more win to his ledger, winning a 10-round decision on the undercard of the Paul vs Tyson spectacle, and we will presumably be hearing a lot more about him.
To comment on this story in the Fight Forum CLICK HERE
-
Featured Articles3 weeks ago
R.I.P Israel Vazquez who has Passed Away at age 46
-
Featured Articles2 weeks ago
A Shocker in Tijuana: Bruno Surace KOs Jaime Munguia !!
-
Featured Articles4 weeks ago
Fighting on His Home Turf, Galal Yafai Pulverizes Sunny Edwards
-
Featured Articles4 weeks ago
The Noted Trainer Kevin Henry, Lucky to Be Alive, Reflects on Devin Haney and More
-
Featured Articles2 weeks ago
Introducing Jaylan Phillips, Boxing’s Palindrome Man
-
Featured Articles4 weeks ago
Avila Perspective, Chap. 306: Flyweight Rumble in England, Ryan Garcia in SoCal
-
Featured Articles2 weeks ago
Cardoso, Nunez, and Akitsugi Bring Home the Bacon in Plant City
-
Featured Articles4 days ago
Usyk Outpoints Fury and Itauma has the “Wow Factor” in Riyadh