Am all for it especially in world and major international title fights including title eliminators and significant bouts involving the top contenders. The change must also include the matter of the refereeing from selection of referees, their proper conduct and delineation of their authority and prerogatives . I notice that in the USA and certain other countries, fights including title fights involving a local and a foreigner are officiated by local referees and panel of judges. I think we cannot rely on the sense of fairness of those officials at all times. Check Pacquiao-Bradley 1.

I doubt if adding more judges will solve the problem Corrupts will always be corrupt. Elimination of judges from the home country of one of the protagonist might help but I already saw scores where one judge who comes from the country of one of the participants scores the fight in favor of the opponent but still the judging is screwed up.

I remember the second fight between Bradley and Pacquiao where the fans watching was given the freedom to submit their scores on the round through on-line. I am sure you also remember this. I think this idea will intimidate the judges from favoring a fighter if they knew that they can get expose by being biased but even this might not solve the problem.

I run out of ideas on how this could be solved. Even machines tend to make mistakes since it is run by humans much more people who can be a subject of corruptions.

They should all be watching the TV coverage on mute. When one guy is watching from one side and another on the other side it's bound to cause differences in the way they see the fight. You can't see everything from one angle all of the time. When Roy Jones Jr was schooling Lacy the judge behind Jones can't possibly have seen the work he was putting in on Lacy, I can't remember what specific round but RJ had his back on the ropes for 3 minutes and Lacy was missing and hitting forearms when Jones was rocking that jaw. If you're sat behind Lacy it looks like he's doing the business but if you're sat with a side view of the action like the TV camera was giving us you're looking at a possible 10-8 round for Jones and he ain't even scored a knockdown!!!

I'd change judges from the certain state or area that the fight is in can't be used for the fight. Other than that there's things that can't be changed like briberys and corruption. Back then the Italian Mob used to run boxing and fixed fights and nothing was done about it.

Maybe more judges than three would help. Plus no judges from the home country of the fighters.

5 judges would be better than just three. I have always thought that the judges are seeing different fights since they are sitting on different sides of the ring.

If in any way you're trying to say the Hopkins /Kovalev scoring was wrong, you're wrong.

The way boxing is judged and scored seems to be getting worse and worse.

Not a week goes by without a controversial decision or out right robbery.

Is it time to rethink the way boxing is judged? Or is it just a case of judges being better trained?

One idea I was thinking of was 5 judges, one on each side of the ring, and one watching the tv coverage. Then all the scores are combined and totaled up to give one score and give a decision.

What are your thoughts?