Boxing Judges Agree with Media

By Boxing Analytics on May 7, 2014
Boxing Judges Agree with Media
Whatever your emotions may tell you, there was no controversy. The real judges nailed it.

The Fight Score Collector tallied 111 scores from ringside media and online reporters watching “The Moment” on pay-per-view…

The diversity in the three judges’ scores for the Mayweather vs. Maidana mega fight Saturday night was a reflection of the media’s diversity of opinion. The Fight Score Collector tallied 111 scores from ringside media and online reporters watching on pay-per-view. The average score of those media members polled was about 115-113. (Technically it was 115.1 – 112.9)

All three official judges’ scores fell within the normal distribution of the media scores. As the chart below indicates, Pernick (114-114) and Moretti’s (116-112) scores were well inside the mainstream grouping of media scores. While Clement’s (117-111) tally was in range, it was close to the edge of the normal distribution (less than 2 σ) of media scores.

We are well aware that media scores hold limited value. The media scores that resulted from watching the fight on television carry questionable weight, unless they were watching with the sound muted to avoid being influenced by the announcers.

But even the ringside media scoring the fight from the press row are influenced. They are not always concentrating 100 percent and are often chatting with their counterparts in nearby seats.

Nevertheless, the great diversity in media scores for this bout were well-reflected by the three official judges. Whatever your emotions may tell you, there is no controversy here. The real judges nailed it.

Follow us on Twitter@boxing_com to continue the discussion

Read More Blogs
Discuss this in our forums

Related Articles

Comments

This is a place to express and/or debate your boxing views. It is not a place to offend anyone. If we feel comments are offensive, the post will be deleted and continuing offenders will be blocked from the site. Please keep it clean and civil! We want to have fun. We want some salty language and good-natured exchanges. But let's keep our punches above the belt...
  1. Daniel E. Nunes 09:32pm, 05/13/2014

    I was a ring performer as a youth and later again while serving in the military as a Vietnam era former Marine. Boxing has always been the primary sport I’ve followed, studied and loved most. Now having passed my mid-60s, many who know me as a boxing historian solicit my projections prior to various major fights; afterwards, they often follow-up by asking my opinion as a self-proclaimed, impartial judge following a particular match.

    This fight was no exception in those regards. Leading up to it, I figured one of three possible outcomes. The first and foremost: Floyd would KO/TKO Marcos somewhere between the 8th to 10th round after being roughed up by Maidana earlier (full projected reasoning for believing so too long winded to be included here.) Next: Maidana wins a decision by having forced Floyd into the ropes then scoring inside to body and head same as he did to Broner. Or else: It ends scored a draw that could have gone either way; Floyd’s scoring from outside negating Marcos’ inside.

    Only for the 3rd time I can remember predictions, I was wrong on all three possible counts (not withstanding Don era-promoted outcomes, of course.) When the fight’s last bell rang and before the judges’ cards were read, I had Maidana winning 7 rounds to Floyd’s 5 rounds, giving Marcos full credit for the many more body punches he landed inside to the big outside ones Floyd deservedly was credited in some close rounds. That was in my opinion watching the live telecast. When I watched its initial replay, my score changed: Marcos 6 rounds, Floyd 4, one even. I believe the reason my score was so far off from the official judges’ opinions had a lot to do with two factors: Maidana’s “effective aggressiveness” in controlling the majority of the bouts’ actual action (how many times was Floyd stalked and forced backwards or into the ropes? -verses the number that Floyd moved Marcos back while scoring big shots?) ...  in my eye, Marcos had around a 4-5 to 1 higher ratio there than Floyd managed. The other thing was that it seemed obvious that the Judges couldn’t possibly have credited Maidana fully for the body shots and other inside scoring he did the numerous times he did get Floyd backed into the ropes. Commentator Al did mention something specifically pertaining to that possible factor in discourse following the live telecast’s decision, but I noticed it had been edited out in the bout’s later rebroadcast.

    The bottom line about scoring in boxing will always be that it’s basically a matter of subjective opinion—- what one values and then looks for in a fight is not always the same as somebody else. As far as “effectiveness” might go in this particular bout, watch the fight again impartially; give each fighter credit when and where it is due, then take a good look at either fighter’s face right after the final bell for a last note on who was really more effective. Floyd’s face showed he took more of a ‘beating’ from Marcos than Marcos’ face did from Floyd’s efforts, ‘nuff said.

  2. Darrell 05:41pm, 05/08/2014

    Mayweather won a hard fought fight, slowly getting the better of Maidana from around round 4 onwards, but not without its moments.  117-111 is at the far end of the scoring spectrum and though in a technical sense it was a reasonable & fair score, it probably doesn’t reflect the effort that Maidana put in to get the fight that we got…..for mine 116-112.  I don’t see a draw at all.  Clean hitting by Mayweather and virtually zilch effective punches by Maidana after round 6 meant there was only one winner.

    I don’t want to see a rematch, a fight with the young lions Thurman & Porter is very attractive…..not Khan, despite beating Collazo with his quick handed offense, he always looks shaky against even moderate punching power and aside from clinching has zero defense.  Easy fight for Mayweather.

  3. Tim 01:57pm, 05/08/2014

    Money May won the fight.  Maidana threw punches.  May was never hurt and landed cleaner stuff.  Better hit percentage, cleaner style.  And towards later rounds was hitting harder.

    Only other fight I wanna see is Money v. Pacman

  4. Guy 11:38am, 05/08/2014

    I scored the fight 115-115. Five rounds apiece and two even. There was no ways Mayweather won the fight by such wide scores as decreed by two of the judges. What worries me about this fight was that both guys came into the ring as champions so the old adage that the challenger has to take the title away from the champion did not apply. Both guys came in as equals or at least should have.

    I say should have because it seems that Mayweather was favoured from the outset by the judges. There was no ways Maidana lost the fight by six and four points. He pressed the action for seven of the 12 rounds (the first five rounds and the last two) yet came up short by six and four points.

    Mayweather was clearly dominated from rounds 1-5 and only got into the fight from round six onwards and yet he wins by such wide margins on two cards. Cmon let’s get real guys, Maidana more than deserves a rematch. He earned a draw fair and square in my eyes and to leave the ring with a loss was an insult.

    If Mayweather has any integrity he must give Maidana a rematch. He knows he did not win that fight. You could see the apprehension on his face just before the scores were announced. He was not confident at all, in fact he looked like a beaten fighter. Maidana got to him and he knew it.

    Hopefully a rematch will happen, and soon. Maidana and the boxing public deserve it.

  5. AKT 07:21am, 05/08/2014

    @Johnny B - Well Stated.

  6. Irish Frankie Crawford Beat Saijo aka Gimpel 12:37pm, 05/07/2014

    Johnny B-Yes, and thank you but I still don’t like his score.

  7. Johnny B 12:10pm, 05/07/2014

    Irish Frankie: May I respectfully disagree?

    Of the 111 press scores, the “mean average” margin of victory for Mayweather was 2.2 points.  But the standard deviation (the average variance of each data point from the mean average) was 2.0.  That indicates, as does the histogram chart, that the media scores were all over the place.

    Clement’s 117-111 score was within 2 standard deviations of the mean average.  Which, in statistics, indicates his score was not an outlier. However, a score of 118-110 would have been considered an outlier.

    Does that make sense?

  8. Irish Frankie Crawford Beat Saijo aka Gimpel 11:36am, 05/07/2014

    Great spin but no cigar…..you did a good job of collecting the data but came up short in drawing your conclusions…look again….111 respondents and Clements almost falls off your chart. He didn’t nail anything other than an opportunity for another nice juicy assignment.

  9. Steven 11:02am, 05/07/2014

    There you have it.  The pros are bought. Simple enough.

Leave a comment