Expert: Lian Shoemake - 10/24/2003

Question
In light of some relatively recent bouts that went to the judges' scorecards, I was compelled to find another opinion on what could be done to further reduce bias and implement objective judging in such bouts. I'll cite for example the Oscar DeLaHoya/Sugar Shane Mosley rematch where we witnessed a greater number of punches by Oscar vs. the more "significant" punches by Shane. How do you think a format with say, four judges and a "technical" scorecard used as a tiebreaker, in the case of an even split, would work? What statistics could be used in such a scorecard? How about using a judge who observed the bout only through the broadcast and would have the benefit of slow motion replays? Maybe averaging out the ringside media reporters' scores and including that. Would such formats reduce the bias or merely "overcomplicate" the present system? I wasn't intending to ask a slew of questions but rather look for an umbrella opinion with all those considerations. Maybe you can come up with a few of your own. Thanks in advance.

Answer
Hi Willis,

Thanks for the intriguing questions.
Scoring in professional boxing always has been and always will be one of the most subjective and controversial aspects in all of professional sports. I've seen many decisions with which I've disagreed, and while I attribute bias and/or corruption to a percentage of those, more often it could just be that I saw the bout differently than the judges at ringside. Indeed, often there is disagreement among those three. At any rate, your suggestions are very interesting, but may be impractical to an extent, inasmuch as not all bouts utilize "punchstat" to record technical information (which I think is largely useless anyway), and most bouts are not televised, so there would be no broadcast for the extra judge to review.

I think part of the answer is comprehensive, standardized training for all judges at all levels (and referees, too).
There should be uniformity in scoring criteria, with effective punching being at the core. There could, and should, still be room for individual preference in the sense that one judge may tend to favor a more aggressive fighter over a defensive wizard, but that should ONLY apply when all other agreed upon criteria (i.e. effective punching) are even.

Frankly, I don't have the answer to how to eliminate bias from boxing judging. Wherever there is a human element, there is the potential of fallibility, and yes, bias. If judges are trained uniformly and held accountable - meaning judges who offer widely divergent scores are sent to the bench indefinitely (ala Dalby Shirley in Las Vegas) - then perhaps boxing could start turning the corner on this issue. Of course, we'd have to find a way to deal with the unholy influence of promoters on officials, but that's a whole different email :)

I hope this is useful, Willis :)

I really appreciate your thought-provoking scenarios!

Feel free to write again!

Regards,
Lian