Apparently, the judges who scored the Lara/Williams fight have all been suspended indefinitely. On the surface, this seems appropriate. However, given the judges are currently undergoing training, the commissioner apparently has every intention of reinstating them. Two things: 1. Does anyone really believe it was incompetence that resulted in the Williams/Lara decision? And not corruption? 2. Even if we give all three judges the benefit of the doubt that they're incompetent and not corrupt, doesn't this imply a serious flaw in New Jersey's hiring practices that all three judges, it turns out, need remedial training? What's it say about every other fight they judged previously? Why wouldn't they just fucking fire them? This is the kind of cronyism bullshit that plagues all of boxing. It's a fucking joke. It's reached a point that as boxing fans, we must be ready to have our intelligence insulted on a regular basis. I'm not an expert on these things, but isn't it likely that when fans begin to feel talked down to, they begin to muster the will to stop watching? btw: Williams is scheduled tentatively to take on Ishida in February, or, "that Japanese boxer," as Lampley refers to him.
Nobuhiro "Go run some more after a pick-up that's dragging a punch-bag" Ishida. :: As for Cronyism vs Incompetence- who knows anymore. Williams lost that fight so bad it wasn't even close. Have a listen to this: and remember, Lederman didn't seem so confident about two of the judges before the scores were called on the night in question but was full of praise for them before the fight. <object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/__Nw_TJlnj0?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/__Nw_TJlnj0?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>
I haven't seen the right so can't comment on the scoring. (although i heard Lara was robbed by just about everybody) The bolded part is curious regardless. Undergoing training? Does that mean they never had any?
Seriously. WTF? And that's giving them the benefit of the doubt - that they're not crooked. If you ask me, they're crooked, and the training thing is a charade, to suggest that it was incompetence and not corruption. But either way, it's unacceptable. The only way NJ could've saved face would've been to fire the judges or do nothing. But to concede that the decision was unacceptable, and then pretend that it was incompetence on the part of all three judges? This is why we should feel insulted. They think we're simpleton dummies who will look past all of the implications of putting them through training in response. Although I guess I do have to entertain the possibility that the commissioner himself is just dumb and doesn't see why his response is problematic.
undergoing REMEDIAL training - as in, being retrained. Judges are supposed to be required to take/retake the judges seminar prior to being licensed/relicensed. Perhaps the problem is in the testing in the first place.
Why not have 5 judges? Would that make it harder or easier to bribe judges? Now bribing two of them might not win you the fight. Or 7 judges? I remember years ago the WBU went to a 20-point must system....seriously. Needless to say it made no odds to anything. It was like Lira, guys were winning fights 109748343 to 101837438 on all three cards. :: Maybe open scoring has its merits in that weird scores can become apparent sooner.
I never understood the point of open scoring. I don't see how it fixes anything when the conclusion anytime there's a score card that defies logic, even when it's all three judges', is simply that they're in need of additional training.
Yeah, so the bout can be suspended while it's going on and the commission can ask the judges why they are scoring it the way they are. They can also let any judges know that if they don't get the scoring more in line with what they think is happening, they can expect to be out of a job. Open scoring can work to everyone's benefit, it just needs to be implemented correctly.
Boxing judges need training? This is one of the stupidest red herrings of all when it comes to questionable scoring. There is a base amount of understanding that judges need to have...the four criteria they are supposed to be looking for, point deductions for knockdowns/penalties and how they affect their cards, what an even round is, the idea that each round is scored on its own...and that's about it The only criteria I have for a good judge is that they score rounds like I do. I can take a 7th grader and he or she can be a great judge even though he has no experience. As I've said before (and Kellerman also believes), if you judge a round in favor of the fighter you would rather have been in the round, you will never have a bad card. You may have a card people disagree with, but that's just the subjective nature of scoring. If you ever score a round for the fighter you would not have preferred to be in that round, then you need to reevaluate wtf you are doing. Finally, if you are reviewing a fight with a judge to determine where and how he 'went wrong', you sure as fuck shouldn't do it with the tv view. You should have cameras either mounted on their melons or right next to them that provide the same view the judge had during the fight. The point of putting judges around the ring is because it is self-apparent that different views of a fight can result in different scoring by competent judges.
It was just a knee-jerk, pathetic reaction. These judges were apparently wrong on scoring about 2 or three rounds throughout the fight. Lederman said Lara won 9-3, one of the suspended judges had it 6-6. Others had it 8-4...and maybe even 7-5 for Lara, as I remember. Controversy sells. HBO and ESPN2 look for controversy wherever and whenever they can find it.
They use open scoring in Mexico all the time, and they've used it in the past in the U.S. Have you ever heard of judges being confronted about their cards mid-fight? Likewise, I'm betting there's plenty of instances in which there were nonsensible scorecards turned in, despite open scoring. No?
I was kidding. Imo, open scoring is fucking stupid. There is perhaps one legitimate reason for it and that's to let the fighters know how they are doing so they can adjust, if necessary. However, boxers have gone over 100 years now without having that capability and the sport is all the better for it. Open scoring for the sake of avoiding controversy in the public is self-deluding, counterproductive, and perhaps nefarious. A judge should never know how fellow judges are scoring a fight because it may and certainly could affect his scoring of later rounds. That's asinine, unfair, and inconsistent with the entire point of judging.
Agree. From what I remember Lederman's card was just as bad as the other judges, just in the other direction. For some reason I wasn't as impressed with Lara as everybody else seemed to be. He was sloppy as shit. Here's the judges and scores according to Boxrec BTW: <small> judge: Donald Givens 116-114 | judge: Hilton Whitaker III 115-114 | judge: Al Bennett 114-114 </small>
That's a good point I hadn't thought of - that open scoring means judges are made aware of how the other judges are scoring the fight. That's just plain stupid. There's other down-sides to open scoring too like the ability of fighters to know when they're well ahead and can afford to coast. But the point here is, for all its disadvantages, it doesn't even serve its purpose of preventing corruption. Makes you wonder why in the hell it's used at all.
Yeah, but if they announced that Williams was still in it after 10 rounds there would have been hell to pay. Instead we had to wait until the fight was OVAH until the penny dropped as to what was happening, be it crookery or incompetence.
This is sarcasm, right? Because let's face it, there would've been no such thing as hell to pay after 10 rounds.
I started watching boxing well after it was finished as a serious sport (if it ever was one)... there's plenty I'd change, but I'm pretty good about enjoying the spectacle despite all the problems. If open scoring became the norm, I think I'd stop watching for good.
I think if the fight is even going into the final round that this should be made known to the combatants if not the audience also.
It is a very overrated robbery. Lara was robbed, but don't take the knee jerk reaction of weak minded clowns as evidence. HBO literally, literally, said they thought Paul Williams was "going to die." in the ring. Williams was never even hurt. He walked forward and took flush shots from a guy who was not setting when punching. HBO went way, way overboard. Lara won and I can't see how Williams won more than a few rounds. People act as if Williams was battered from pillar to post.
