Open scoring?

[Vast]

Open scoring. What Do you guys think of this?
I've never heard of this before. I think I like it. It might prevent judges from missscoring.

Galaxy S3

[aholbert32]

Re: Open scoring?

Open scoring. What Do you guys think of this?
I've never heard of this before. I think I like it. It might prevent judges from missscoring.

Galaxy S3

Its ****ing horrible. It ruins the drama of the fight and causes fighters who are up late to run and play it safe. it will lead to more decision.s

[JayBee74]

Re: Open scoring?

It especially ruins the drama when the scoring is bad in the first place.

Another thing........ 40,000 screaming fans, 38,500 for Alvarez. A little intimidation factor there?

[Dos_Santos]

Re: Open scoring?

Not a fan but this isn't the fight to complain about it.

[N51_rob]

Re: Open scoring?

Its ****ing horrible. It ruins the drama of the fight and causes fighters who are up late to run and play it safe. it will lead to more decision.s

Could not have said it better myself.

[steelcityjames]

Re: Open scoring?

totally hate it!

[pietasterp]

Re: Open scoring?

It especially ruins the drama when the scoring is bad in the first place.

Another thing........ 40,000 screaming fans, 38,500 for Alvarez. A little intimidation factor there?

I think this is the issue for me, JayBee...I don't have a problem with it in theory, but the problem isn't open vs closed scoring, it's the accuracy / competency of the scoring that matters. If the scoring is dead-on, or at least within a margin that most would deem reasonable, then it probably doesn't much matter if it's open or not. If one guy is obviously winning all the rounds and the scores reflect that, in general the other corner realizes that and will gameplan accordingly (ditto for the other side).

But the actual execution of it has generally resulted in some pretty sub-optimal outcomes, i.e. the leading fighter getting on his bike the rest of the way or similar changes in tactics. My issue with this Canelo fight was that the scoring was so off, in my opinion, that it made the last 4 rounds irrelevant (since Trout would have needed a KO to win, and there was zero chance that was going to happen). I've seen completely open scoring with the scores announced at the end of every round, and it's sort of hit-or-miss. It's not clear that it changes the way the scores go, but it definitely saps the bout of that tension waiting for the judges' decisions...

The fact that there are decisions in boxing at all is a source of irritation for me...I mean, I know there's no better way (not advocating going back to the 1900's and 100+ rounds of bare-knuckle action), but when fights go to the cards it always seems like a bit of a failure or Achilles' heel in the sport because of the extreme subjectivity. Honestly, when fights go to decision, boxing is at that point not fundamentally different from figure skating, which I've always considered more of an exhibition than competition specifically because the results are entirely determined by judges, not by some objective happening on the field of play.

[JayBee74]

Re: Open scoring?

But the actual execution of it has generally resulted in some pretty sub-optimal outcomes, i.e. the leading fighter getting on his bike the rest of the way or similar changes in tactics.

Praise shouldn't be heaped on Alvarez for his late/last round tactics. Remember how Sergio Martinez fought Chavez up until the last second? You didn't need any scorecard reveal to know that he was way ahead on the cards, but even after getting knocked down in the 12th he was furiously fighting back.

[HuPeRcHiLd]

Re: Open scoring?

Open scoring is absolute garbage. It killed any drama that the Trout/Alvarez had at the end. Seems very Amateurish...

[BezO]

Re: Open scoring?

Love it! I'd prefer fighters knew the score after EVERY round.

I'm trying to think of other sports where the competitors don't know the score until after the event is done, and I can't think of any.

Sure, the leader may run to hold a lead, but...

• You can't continue to win rounds just running. This tactic only works if the fight is out of reach. Ask the Golden Boy. I'm sure he fights different if he knows the score.
• The losing fighter also knows the score and can add pressure as needed. This was actually the PERFECT fight for this IMO. A fighter that would normally think the fight was close and proceed one way had the opportunity to change his game plan based on the actual score. Not as suspenseful, but still dramatic.
• In every sport, knowing the score changes a player's/team's strategy along the way. A running team has to pass more when down at the end of games (NFL). A power team may play some small ball in a close game (MLB). A team may remove their goalie (Soccer).
• Imagine a fighter like Mayweather behind on the cards towards the end of a fight. That's drama. Does he open up? Put more on punches? How would Mayweather look as an offensive fighter?

[aholbert32]

Re: Open scoring?

Love it! I'd prefer fighters knew the score after EVERY round.

I'm trying to think of other sports where the competitors don't know the score until after the event is done, and I can't think of any.

Sure, the leader may run to hold a lead, but...

• You can't continue to win rounds just running. This tactic only works if the fight is out of reach. Ask the Golden Boy. I'm sure he fights different if he knows the score.
• The losing fighter also knows the score and can add pressure as needed. This was actually the PERFECT fight for this IMO. A fighter that would normally think the fight was close and proceed one way had the opportunity to change his game plan based on the actual score. Not as suspenseful, but still dramatic.
• In every sport, knowing the score changes a player's/team's strategy along the way. A running team has to pass more when down at the end of games (NFL). A power team may play some small ball in a close game (MLB). A team may remove their goalie (Soccer).
• Imagine a fighter like Mayweather behind on the cards towards the end of a fight. That's drama. Does he open up? Put more on punches? How would Mayweather look as an offensive fighter?

Open scoring destroys close fights. Lets say Canelo was up by 2 rounds going into the 12. What does he do? He would run the entire round. Trout could apply all the pressure he wants but Canelo wouldve never given him the oppurtunity to land because he would be running and trying to run out the clock. Thats not dramatic at all. I stopped paying attention to the fight once I learned Canelo knew he was up big after the 8th. People who are in favor of this must also enjoy watching teams run out the clock.

Your De La Hoya example is actually an argument against open scoring. DLH made an assumption that he was up and decided to run in the last round. I'm completely OK with fighters making that assumption. Its a risk but a risk a fighter can take. That assumption leads to either dramatic fights or historic mistakes made by fighters who assumed wrong. No one will be talking about the Canelo/Trout years from now and part of the reason why is because Canelo ran most of the last 4 rounds because he knew he was up.

[JayBee74]

Re: Open scoring?

This isn't very analytical but open scoring sucks.

[BezO]

Re: Open scoring?

Open scoring destroys close fights. Lets say Canelo was up by 2 rounds going into the 12. What does he do? He would run the entire round. Trout could apply all the pressure he wants but Canelo wouldve never given him the oppurtunity to land because he would be running and trying to run out the clock. Thats not dramatic at all. I stopped paying attention to the fight once I learned Canelo knew he was up big after the 8th. People who are in favor of this must also enjoy watching teams run out the clock.

Let's back your scenario up a round or 2. Let's say Canelo is up by 1 round going into the 11th or even going into the 10th. How dramatic are those rounds with both fighters knowing the score?

Sure, if you get to your scenario, it might kill some of the drama in the last round. I guess I'm looking at the positive side. The losing fighter knows the score and knows he has to make a move. The score is know by bother fighters the entire fight. Just like other sports, players/teams have to turn it on when they're down. But you have to know the score to do so.

I think the drama is just substituted. 10 round fight, 5th round, fighter down 4-1. Losing fighter not knowing the score may stick with his game plan. Those might have been close rounds with the losing fighter not knowing he's down 3 rounds already. Losing fighter knowing the score has to turn it on. Too early for the winning fighter to shut it down. Next few rounds are possibly much more exciting than if the fighters didn't know the score.

It's not the winning team running out the clock that I like. It's the losing team's adjustments & desperation. It's the great comeback. We see comebacks in boxing, but we don't know how great it was or even if it was a comeback until after the fight is over. And how many possible comebacks do we miss because a fighter doesn't know he's losing a little earlier?

Your De La Hoya example is actually an argument against open scoring. DLH made an assumption that he was up and decided to run in the last round. I'm completely OK with fighters making that assumption. Its a risk but a risk a fighter can take. That assumption leads to either dramatic fights or historic mistakes made by fighters who assumed wrong. No one will be talking about the Canelo/Trout years from now and part of the reason why is because Canelo ran most of the last 4 rounds because he knew he was up.

Fighters make that assumption all the time. It's not always as obvious as DLH did it, but fighters pull up when they think they're ahead.

I think open scoring is great EXCEPT in that scenario. I guess I'm thinking more about leading up to the scenario you posted. The excitement created by one fighter trying to avoid that scenario is where it's at. Because of that, maybe more fights are closer going into the final rounds. And how dramatic is a fight where both fighters know they need everyone of those championship rounds?

[Sundown2600]

Re: Open scoring?

From a fan's perspective it is a complete suspense killer. From a fighter's perspective or a fighter's team pov I think it's great for them.

[blackceasar]

Re: Open scoring?

Open scoring sucks and this is why. It's simple. If I don't know how the judges are scoring my fight, then I need to be pushing it all the time. I don't mean letting my hands go all the time, but it's going to have me at a heightened sense of awareness all the time during the fight. The funny thing is that the boxing industry wants to talk crap about MMA fighters, but every time I've heard the saying "never leave it up to the judges", its come from an MMA fighter, not a boxer.

I rest my case.