Resistance to Change: Let’s Reform the Judging System

Resistance to Change: Let’s Reform the Judging System

By Jack Thomas Davies

Boxing will never be simple; our beautiful sport comes with a long list of issues that for a long time have needed change.

Just this last week, many fans were angered to have seen that Callum Smith picked up a win over his mandatory challenger John Ryder.

Although there were many close rounds, supporters were in uproar that the scorecards were so wide in favour of the ‘home-fighter’.

What we need to take from this past weekend is that poor judging happens consistently in boxing at all types of levels. Although scoring is subjective, one could remember many a time where the ‘away-fighter’ was not given a decision. This occurs at all levels, from the small hall shows to the bright-lights of large arenas.

What I would propose is that boxing, especially in title fights needs two more judges. The system would take the five scores and take the three middle scorecards in order to eliminate any possible wide scoring.

Similar ideas to this have been suggested in the past, this is all together a radical change. In any case, the boxing world needs to welcome ideas from those who believe that the sport can often get stuck in its own ways.

Some may remember controversial decisions such as when in 2017 Nevada judge Adalaide Byrd turned in a 10-rounds-to-two scorecard favouring Canelo Alvarez over Gennady Golovkin in the most significant U.S. bout of the year to create a draw, or when Timothy Bradley Jr. defeated Manny Pacquiao in a highly criticised 2012 decision.

WBC president, Mauricio Sulaiman, proposed the idea at the WBC conference this year, claiming that “there’s nothing more damaging to boxing than a controversial decision.

In those title fights that are complicated and complex [to find unilateral support for three judges], the risk of a bad decision will [decrease] in a high level with five judges.”

In the boxing world, there will always be a resistance to change. Who is to say that implementing this new system would have any negative impact?

In any case, most would agree that when a scorecard is controversial, it is mostly forgotten about until the next big fight night. Judges who are consistent in scoring a bout against the grain should have to be held to account and fully explain their scorecards, or at the very least we should have extra opinions for them to be compared against.