At the Taylor vs Ouma fight, the WBC introduced an open scoring system which informs the fighters at the 4th and 8th rounds of the Judges actual score cards. Do you think that this is a good thing for boxing? Personally I have mixed feelings. On one side, i fighter down on the cards may change his style and certainly put more effort, hopefully creating a better, more entertaining fight. On the flip side, a fighter may just run for the last 3 rounds if he's far enough ahead the cards, still being confident in the victory.
Had Winky Wright the benefit of open scoring, he'd be the middle weight champion today.
What's your opinion?
2006-12-10 04:31:33 · 6 answers · asked by Peter G 2 in Sports ➔ Boxing
i totally agree it is a bad idea. its the trainers job to let the fighter know if hes ahead or behind. an open scoring system ruins the suspense of the decision. i think its HORRIBLE IMPLEMENT TO THE BOXING WORLD
2006-12-10 06:39:18 · answer #1 · answered by troubledrican 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
At the very least it would expose the wildly ridiculous scoring of say a Malvina Wright (excuse any misspelling)that makes a mockery of boxing decisions..and that couldn't be bad, but as a whole I find it wrong...you change it to a football game where the late leader goes into a prevent defense and all a prevent defense does is prevent the fan from seeing a complete game
2006-12-10 08:32:57 · answer #2 · answered by chiefof nothing 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a bad idea. It makes the fight boring. After the 8th round, the fighter who's ahead is just gonna stall and back down making the fight boring. It's a bad idea and they need to get rid of it.
2006-12-10 04:42:00 · answer #3 · answered by LaissezFaire 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bad Idea. It causes winning fighters to freeze at the end of the fights.
I would rather see them go to a 16-round format to encourage knock-outs. These 12-round hugfests have got to stop.
No one can tell me that Winky and JT don't have knockout power... Or that PBF should not have knocked out Baldo... "My hand hurt", your a boxer, it's going to happen.
2006-12-10 11:15:22 · answer #4 · answered by James M 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i might vote for the 360. i think of they have finally have been given the bugs out. (under no circumstances purchase a launch product!) they have additionally prolonged the guaranty, to conceal the poor individuals who have been given the bum machines. i've got under no circumstances performed Wii. It looks like relaxing, yet i might think of you will get drained after awhile. i could be good for particular video games, yet no longer all. I each so often play workstation video games or xbox for hours and hours. do no longer see that occuring on a Wii. perhaps it incredibly is a sturdy element. i might take a 360 over a PS3 because of the fact I choose 360's video games. To be honest, I play greater video games on my workstation than my xbox. i like FPS's, and different than perhaps Halo, i like them greater effective on a workstation. does no longer or no longer it incredibly is beneficial in the event that they weren't so high priced and we could have all of them?
2016-10-05 03:15:54 · answer #5 · answered by lyon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm against it. Our reasoning is the same.
2006-12-10 06:00:56 · answer #6 · answered by Brent 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋