Alvarez vs. Trout: Open scoring a bad idea

By sslg99 - 04/21/2013 - Comments

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERABy sslg99: First of all, I would like to congratulate both Saul “Canelo” Alvarez (42-0-1., 30 KO’s) and Austin Trout (26-1, 14 KO’s) for putting on a great fight last night at the Alamodome, in San Antonio, Texas. They both fought better than they ever had before and they both gave their opponent a lot of trouble. The fight could have gone either way. Personally I had it 114-113 for Austin Trout, But I would have completely understood a draw. I would even be fine with a 1-2 point lead for Alvarez. If the outcome of the fight was a draw I think both fighters would get more credit and there would be a larger clause for Alvarez – Trout 2, which is a fight I would love to see.

A close decision was not the case, the scoring was terrible. 118-109 (the outcome that the WBA judge had) was disgraceful. Bad judging is the reason why many casual boxing fans are straying from the sweet science and heading off to watch MMA. So many great fights are spoiled because of the decision, and both fighters, winner and loser, are hurt because of it. Lets take Manny Pacquiao – Tim Bradley for example. I and pretty much everyone else in the world knows that Bradley didn’t Deserve the decision. But if you watched the fight you would know that Bradley did surprisingly well and it was a very good fight. Because of the decision Bradley got no credit, and when people think of the fight they don’t think that Bradley did a great job stepping up in class.

Pacquiao proved he still had what it takes to compete at an elite level, and that it was an overall good fight. They think of the robbery and the scorecards. Boxing fans don’t watch fights to see the scorecards, they watch the fight to watch the fight. But every time we get a bad decision , which is far too much, it makes us boxing fans just think about the scoring, and it takes away some of the magic of a fight.

This was the first night the experiment of open scoring was on display at a huge venue where everyone was watching, and I would like to say, experiment failed. When the fighters know the exact score of the fight, one of two things can happen. Either they get reckless because they know they need to dominate to win. example: Trout in round 12 he fought stupid because he needed a knockout and it cost him the round on my card, and made for a dull round. The other thing that can happen is a fighter knows he is winning by a large margin and fights boring because he doesn’t need to win the round, he just has to avoid getting knocked out. Open scoring makes the fight worst and destroys the excitement of the decision.



Comments are closed.