The Problems with Olympic Boxing and the Olympic Judging System it Uses

The boxing competition has been underway at the 2008 Beijing Olympics since the first day and will continue to be fought until the last day of the games. So this is the perfect time to dissect amateur boxing - specifically, Olympic boxing, which is actually not the only style of amateur boxing - its rules and its flaws. If you have been waiting to tune in but need some help deciphering then here's your guide and if you have headaches over its inadequacies, well, I can certainly relate.

There have already been controversial decisions at the Beijing Olympics and there will undoubtedly be more to come. The system that is in place for Olympic boxing was actually supposed to prevent controversy and be more reliable, but clearly it still has a good deal of flaws.

The Basic Rules and Judging of Olympic Boxing

During the Beijing games there will be five judges scoring each bout. However, they don't score the bout according to professional rules. Professional boxing matches are scored using a 10-point must system. Generally speaking, the winner of a round gets 10 points and the loser gets 9 points, that's before any knockdowns, fouls or any lopsided or even rounds. Each round is scored on the basis of landing clean blows, controlling the action (also known as ring generalship) and defense. Effective aggression also comes into play- throwing a lot of punches and missing doesn't win you the round just because you were the guy who walked forward. Hard punches generally sway the judges more than softer blows and knockdowns are automatic deductions of a point.

The Olympic judging of boxing isn't scored on rounds using the aforementioned criteria. It's a basic counting of punches, each judge essentially makes a computer tally when he sees a punch landed, and the winner of the bout is the guy with the most punches landed at the end of four, two-minute rounds. Individual rounds aren't awarded, and the tactical elements that often decide professional boxing matches aren't included. Perhaps overly simplistic but at least its easily digestible: land the most punches and you win the fight...right?

The Problems with the Olympic Judging of Boxing

1. The computer tallying system: Each of those five judges has a computer device that they use to score the fight. They are supposed to press a button for each fighter when they see a clean punch landed by him. In order for a punch to count at least three judges have to press the appropriate button within one second. That's good in principle, but try getting three boxing judges to agree on anything, let alone agree on a clean punch landed within one second while watching a fight live. In watching a fight there will be multiple times when you see a hard shot land flush on somebody's face, only to see them not receive credit for it. Having three people "buzz in" within a second of each other while watching a match is too complicated to be consistent. There are two fighters in there, and you have to watch both of them. You have to be instantaneous with your scoring and the rest of the judges have to be too. Body punches and punches thrown from close quarters are almost never counted because they either can't be seen or nobody agrees and the definitions of a shot to the face that actually do count are muddled at best.

The Solution: Instead of five judges all trying to score the same punch for both fighters, you start with six judges per match. These six are then divided, with three having a responsibility for only one of the fighters involved. Instead of needing three of them to agree on each punch landed, you tally up the individual punches that every one of the judges scores. You average those scores to get the fighter's score for the round, and at the end of the bout you add the totals to find the winner. Less confusion and work for the judges, which results in more punches getting counted when they're supposed to.

2. Knockdowns don't count: This isn't some sort of cruel joke I'm bestowing onto a public that surely hasn't seen much Olympic boxing, I unfortunately could not be more serious; knockdowns do not count in Olympic boxing. I'm not quite sure how this came to be, it's like calling something football and then saying "but you can't run the ball for a touchdown! And no sacks...or interceptions!" If a fighter gets knocked down and can stand himself back up, he gets to the count of eight to collect himself, and then the fight goes on as if nothing ever happened. If a boxer gets knocked down three times in a round, or four times total, the fight is stopped, but otherwise it's like the Mafia committing a crime in broad daylight: hundreds of witnesses, but everybody pretends nothing happens. Watching a match this weekend I saw a fighter get knocked down, and not only did the aggressor not get any extra points for his efforts, the inept Olympic judges didn't even score the landing blow.

The solution: Score knockdowns! It's really that simple, when a fighter lands a punch that knocks somebody down, that fighter gets an extra 2 points, from every judge scoring the bout, automatically.

3. Defining a "clean" punch: Most people, even casual boxing fans, can turn on any fight and see when a punch lands. The fist of fighter A lands on the face of fighter B... and bingo, there was a landed punch. But the Olympic judging of boxing is different. A fighter has a large white patch in the center of his glove where his fist is. A punch is only counted if that white part makes flush contact with the opposition. Punches to the side of the head aren't counted, only punches to the front of the face are tallied. Body punches are ignored and as previously discussed, punches are often missed due to the computerized scoring system.

The solution: A punch that lands, counts as a punch. I understand and agree with the white portions of the gloves, that has been a staple of the amateur boxing system for quite some time. It's intended to discourage slapping and wildly throwing punches, while promoting sound technique and solid shots. It just doesn't work as intended in this system. In combination with the other rules and the actual applications of them in a hectic, crowded boxing ring, it all just leaves too much unaccounted for. Landing a punch anywhere on the head, besides to the back which is a foul, counts for a point. Punches landed to the front of somebody's chest and stomach count as a landed punch, regardless of the perceived effect.

Would this completely fix the Olympic judging of boxing? No, but it would be a solid start and could prevent the inevitable bad decisions that have come to define the sport. Prohibiting judges from the host country being involved in a match with a fighter from the host country would also be ideal, as would be the implementation of full length, three minute rounds. But I'll take what I can get, and I'd start with the three areas mentioned above.