now in boxing they are going to have open scoring, which means u wont have to wait until the end to see who wins. wbc just decided this it will take action in november sometime. but go ahead and say whether your for it ... or not and please give reasons.
2006-11-02 06:36:30 · 5 answers · asked by beccaboo 2 in Sports ➔ Boxing
The WBC has been talking about doing this for twelve years already--since Chavez vs. Whitaker. It's hard to believe that this time they're really going to do it. :P
Personally, I don't want to see it. Although it'll make the judges a bit more responsible for their scoring, I don't see it making much of a difference because it's not like a judge can be replaced in the middle of a fight. All this will do is put more of a focus during the fight on the scoring rather than the fighters themselves. And it'll be really boring when you know for sure that one fighter is winning by a shut-out. :(
It may just be me, but I like the element of surprise that comes with not knowing the scores until they're announced at the end of a bout.
2006-11-05 11:11:55 · answer #1 · answered by Flif 7 · 11⤊ 2⤋
I think that they should just leave it alone. I understand that the idea is to keep the judges in check. But what if the round is blatantly miss-cored? Will the corner-men want to wage a protest for that round? I think that open scoring will be a distraction to the fight and could take the boxers away from their initial game plan. Yes, there have been aggravating upsets, but, that's boxing!
2006-11-06 03:47:14 · answer #2 · answered by The Keeper of the Green 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Only problem I see is that if a boxer knows he or she is well ahead, they have a tendency to run and stop boxing. Becomes very boring.
2006-11-02 11:56:19 · answer #3 · answered by boxmel 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
it's a good idea to watch these rotten judges.
2006-11-02 13:18:59 · answer #4 · answered by saxaphonist 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD IDEA
2006-11-02 07:15:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋