website statistics
Jump to content
  • Register/Login on Totallympics!

    Sign up to Totallympics to get full access to our website.

     

    Registration is free and allows you to participate in our community. You will then be able to reply to threads and access all pages.

     

    If you encounter any issues in the registration process, please send us a message in the Contact Us page.

     

    We are excited to see you on Totallympics, the home of Olympic Sports!

     

Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024


Totallympics

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Illya said:

So tomorrow we will lose our boxers in Italy. Really bad level from Ukrainians + not transparent judging = only 1 quota in Paris :yes

Ukrainian women in particular have been doing very poorly recently. In the old days it was the strongest nation in Europe next to Russia, and now they are losing to Poles and other European nations. Maybe they don't have money to prepare?

Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613808
Share on other sites

I mostly agree that the current scoring system doesn't work effectively. For me I would just change the default score for a round to 10-8 and then only close rounds be scored 10-9 and one sided rounds 10-7 rather than the current system where unless you batter the shit out of someone for three minutes straight, the score will be 10-9. This would obviously deviate from pro boxing and make the sytem more complex and being simple to understand is the primary logic behind the current scoring system but I think it would make fights more interesting and should make judging decisions more accurate

 

Yes, the judges here are just bad, but there were only probably a couple of decisions they actually got wrong today though (Csemez :SVK 3-2 Gonzalez :USA and Ovezov :TKM 3-2 Shahbakhsh :IRI are the two that spring to mind but I would need to watch them again to be sure). Obviously I only saw half of a lot of fights and missed some entirely but this was the sense I got. I think the IOC is kind of using the qualifying tournaments to figure out who the bad judges are so hopefully by the Olympics the judging will be closer to competent but obviously using the qualifying tournaments to do this is far from ideal.

 

 

2 hours ago, dodge said:

That and a warning being too big of a punishment.

Anyway this is what I actually wanted to address because the comentators made this mistake too. This statement is sort of true but also not really true at all. In actuality one warning (point deduction) can almost never change the result of a fight. Two and ye you have to win all three rounds for at least 3 judges to win the fight which is obviously pretty devastating but one deduction doesn't really do anything because of how ties are scored. 

 

So disregarding 10-8s typically the possible scores are 30-27, 29-28, 28-29 and 27-30. If a judge gives all three rounds to the same boxer points deductions can never effect anything (3rd points deduction is a disqualification) so the score changes to 30-26 or 27-29 (30-25 and 27-28 with 2 warnings) not effecting the result at all. If a boxer loses 28-29 and has a points deduction then it just changes to 27-29 and again no impact on the outcome of the fight. The confusing one is when a boxer wins two rounds and has a points deduction in which the score does indeed change to 28-28 but whats crucial here is the rules regarding tied scorecards.

 

I don't think this is widely understood very well but the rule regarding tied scores is if the judges who have it tied can effect the outcome, then they go back to those judges and they pick a winner. Basically if the tied scores matter the relevant judges pick a winner and as such you can never end a fight with the score being 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0. 

 

I'll use an actual example to explain this. So lets look at one of today's 57kg fights Carlo Paalam :PHI vs Andrey Bonilla :MEX. This fight ended 3-1 to Paalam after Bonilla got a point deduction for what was basically a body slam. (Paalam seemed to hurt his shoulder so hopefully he is ok) (Also its a while since I have seen a boxer as dirty as Bonilla. Would not want to have to box him.) So the judges scores ended up being 29-27 (29-28), 29-27 (29-28), 27-29 (27-30), 28-28 (28-29), 29-27 (29-28) (score with no deduction in brackets) where judges 1,2 and 5 had Paalam winning two rounds and losing one. Judge 3 having Bonilla winning all three and judge 4 having Bonilla winning 2 and losing one round. With the points deduction obviously meaning that judge 4's score was tied. All the other judges results were unaffected by the deduction. Because judge 4's score couldn't change the outcome of the fight his scorecard was simply left as a tie. If he was asked he almost certainly would have given Bonilla the fight given that he gave him 2 rounds and Paalam only one but that would still only make the score 3-2 so it is just left as a tie and the fight's score is 3-1.

 

If for example one more judge went in favour of Bonilla the scores in the Paalam Bonilla fight would therfore be 29-27, 29-27, 27-29, 28-28, 28-28. This fight would not end 2-1 in favour of Paalam. The two tied scores, in this hypothethical case judge 4 and 5, could cumalatively change the winner of the fight so they go back to judge 4 and 5 and they both pick a winner. Again, crucially for a fight to be 28-28 the boxer who received a points deduction has to have won two rounds for that judge and therefore that judge logically would almost always pick that boxer to win. In this scenario the score with a points deduction would be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla assuming judge 4 and 5 are logical and if the points deduction never happened the score would also be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla.

 

To emphasize this any fight where with tied scores the fight initially is scored 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0 the tied judges choose a victor and because the only way to have a points deduction and a tied score (not including 10-8 scenarios) is where the boxer who received a deduction won 2 rounds for the tied judge/ judges. Logically one point deduction should never change the outcome of a fight. 

 

Unfortunately for my argument and the reason I had to caveat everything above with almosts is there are occasionally counter examples and one actually happened today. In the Susan Aguas :ECU vs Marjona Savrieva :AZE fight at W50kg, Savrieva picked up a points deduction in the third round and the scores ended up being 30-26, 29-27, 28-28, 28-28 and 28-28 as a result. As explained above Aguas doesn't win the fight 2-0, the three tied judges could and should have changed the final outcome so judge 3,4 and 5 choose their winner. Judge 3 and 5 of course chose Savrieva having both given her 2 rounds. Whats strange though is on this occasion judge 4 despite giving Savrieva the first 2 rounds and Aguas only the third decided that Aguas won the fight which as I say doesn't really make much logical sense. If judge 4 believed Aguas was that dominant in the third round then that round should have been scored 10-8 by said judge. I think I have only ever seen this scenario of illogical tied decisions happen once or twice.

 

Apologies for probably overexplaining this a bit but it is quite counterintuitive and the morale of the story is barring stupidity or a second non standard score ( second points deduction/ 10-8 round) one solitary warning despite seemingly changing the scores a lot should never change the ultimate outcome of a fight.

 

Just finally there is funny quirk of this system where if you win a fight for 3 judges and 2 have it tied (be it a points deduction or a 10-8 round) you would win a split decision 3-0. However if you win a fight for just 1/2 judges and the other 3/4 have it tied. The tied judges are then evaluated again and if they all give you the fight you would then win a unanimous decision 5-0.

Obviously this doesn't effect the result or anything but I just think its funny that potentially winning one less round for 1/2 judges in rare cases can actually turn a split decision win into a unanimous win.

This happened in the Maud Van der Toorn :NED vs Jennifer Fernadez :ESP fight where after Van der Toorn had a points deduction 1 judge had her winning (having given her all three rounds) and the other 4 judges had it tied but having given her 2 rounds gave her the fight. If she had convinced two more judges to give her all 3 rounds (Not that she deserved 3 rounds, Fernandez deservedly won round 2) she would have the fight 3-0 and it would have been a split decision and not a unanimous one.

Edited by Ogreman
Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613814
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ogreman said:

Yes, the judges here are just bad, but there were only probably a couple of decisions they actually got wrong today though (Csemez :SVK 3-2 Gonzalez :USA

 

Never heard in my life about boxing judges which would favour a Slovak boxer over USA (especially a former world champion and kinda USA poster boy.)

 

+ I watched the bout life on Olympic Channel, and you know, when even both their announcers (usually USA biased) called it fair call I am quite surprised to read this from you. but, Sure, ok, it is your oppinion and you are entitled to have it.

 

Bandi won both first 2 rounds fairly (again both OC commentators admitted it), in the last Gonzalez was clearly much much better but it came too late for him and Bandi knew after the 2 rounds he do not need to risk anymore and at the end he did the job and kept his win.

 

Only Gonzalez is here to blame for being extremely passive in both first rounds and underestimated Bandi, definitely not the judges, which in opposite were surprisingly pretty fair and not "fall" under the name of the favorite and stronger/more important country.

Edited by hckošice
Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613826
Share on other sites

I saw there's a surprising amount of Dutch athletes still in it, so it got me slightly interested :p Is there like a daily schedule or something to be found somewhere?

.

Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613856
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, heywoodu said:

I saw there's a surprising amount of Dutch athletes still in it, so it got me slightly interested :p Is there like a daily schedule or something to be found somewhere?

https://boxing.athlete365.org/boxing-road-to-paris-2024/1st-world-qualification-tournament/

 

At the bottom are the schedules, results etc.

Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613857
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dodge said:

Refs don’t give any scores. Judges do.

 

It’s a very hard sport to judge, and generally they do a good job. The majority of people watching on TV have no idea what they’re looking at. It most certainly isn’t random. 
 

10 points for winning a round take all the drama out of most 3rd rounds. That’s the biggest issue. That and a warning being too big of a punishment.

 

Maybe if some countries have the balls to leave the IBA the sport can revert back to point per blow scoring and stop trying to compete with the pro ranks. 
 

99% of “robbery” calls are just sore losers whinging IMO

IMHO AIBA driven boxing was happy enough even to use that 1% at the right moment. Ut was enough to "fix" even Olympic medals.

Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613861
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, copravolley said:

Ukrainian women in particular have been doing very poorly recently. In the old days it was the strongest nation in Europe next to Russia, and now they are losing to Poles and other European nations. Maybe they don't have money to prepare?

It is not only the question of money. The war influences much more.

 

To be successfull enough in sport one should be fully focused on the tournament. But it is almost impossible because the first thing Ukrainian athletes do when they can - they check news to know what cities were hit by russians and if their relatives are alive.

 

The other issue - sport facillities. A lot were destroyed. And a lot of sport and recreation objectes are at the occupied territories. Some of them are used by russian athletes themselves to prepare for international competitions

 

Thus it is one more important reason to suspend russian athletes and why it is fair. Thieves cannot benefit from robbery. But even those who did not steal something themselves are not allowed to benefot from stolen property.

 

Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613864
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, copravolley said:

Ukrainian women in particular have been doing very poorly recently. In the old days it was the strongest nation in Europe next to Russia, and now they are losing to Poles and other European nations. Maybe they don't have money to prepare?

No, because Anastasia Kovalchuk 2 years ago upset unknown noname Stanimira Petrova at the European Champs (who is she, I don't know :lol:), and became the champion. So something is definitely going wrong way with the start of war because now our girls have bigger chances than men

Link to comment
https://totallympics.com/forums/topic/26292-boxing-ioc-olympic-qualifier-1-2024/page/38/#findComment-613866
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Posts around Totallympics

    • Loubineaud raised his voice before the Olympics, but I don't think it was heard much... There is also something to consider, the french federation seemed to have deal with the dutch federation some training privileges for the french athletes.
    • If anything France should be considering hosting the speed skating at an exhibition hall, like Milan did.Never been a fan of hosting events in other countries if a solution can be found in the host country.
    • I think, that FIS should be trying to limit Norway's advantage, not further help them... Klaebo is strong enough to wins without their help. It's fortunate that Norway no longer dominates the women's competition, as much as it did during the Johaug and Bjoergen era, because that would be truly boring... I'm also not a huge fan of Russia's return, but the fact is that without Bolsuhnov, Klaebo hasn't lost to anyone in last 4 years and is, in that`s sense, a very lucky man (apart from his immense class). Paradoxically, without Putin and the war in Ukraine, Klaebo would have a much harder time makes the kind of string of victories, when he does here.
    • if it's about your gain, better 50% of San Siro stadium than 100% of the Bormio ski stadium, but if it's about how it looks, if it's about "perception", always better a full arena (big or small doesn't really matter, that's why they use the filled seats percentage to measure the impact)
    • Finnish ski association released a statement. Translated using DeepL. You can find it here in finnish: https://hiihtoliitto.fi/hiihtoliitto-pyytaa-fisn-eettista-toimielinta-selvittamaan-olympiasprintin-tapahtumat/ The Ski Association lodged a protest against the competition because, after the competition, it emerged that FIS had granted the Norwegian service team permission to bring a waxing table into the service area during the sprint skiing stage, even though this was not permitted under the advance instructions given by FIS to the teams and not even brought into the supervised service area. FIS did not inform other national teams about the possibility of using waxing pads. In addition, after the competition, it became apparent that the US national team had brought prohibited liquids into the service area. According to the rules, bringing any kind of liquid into the supervised service area was strictly prohibited, but no action was taken. Norwegian and US skiers won all the medals in the competition. The FIS later apologized for its actions and admitted that mistakes had been made in both cases.   According to Marleena Valtasola, Executive Director of the Finnish Ski Association, the FIS has not yet given the Ski Association a decision on Finland's protest.   "Despite several requests, we have not received a decision on our protest or answers to related questions. According to Norwegian media reports, FIS has rejected our complaint, but we have not been given any official decision. We interpret this to mean that the FIS has not even agreed to consider the matter. We find this very strange, considering that the FIS has publicly admitted that a mistake was made in the competition," says Valtasola. There has been public discussion about the protest deadline having been exceeded. However, the deadline for protests is one month after the end of the competition when a rule violation only becomes apparent after the competition. Our protest should therefore have been considered.   As a follow-up, we will ask the FIS's independent ethics body to investigate the matter and its handling. This body does not take a position on the results of the competition or the competition rules, so we are not demanding that the performances of the Norwegian or American skiers be invalidated. Rather, our demand is to investigate the events of the competition from the perspective of fairness, says Valtasola. It cannot be the case that some competitors are subject to different rules than others. In our opinion, it is also unacceptable for the protest to be simply swept under the carpet. Actions must be based on fair rules.   Through its actions, the Ski Association wants to promote fair competition and ensure that all athletes and teams have equal opportunities to compete for victory in the future.   We chose this course of action because it is the best solution from a sporting perspective and we believe that it offers the greatest opportunity to influence the future. Above all, it is a question of reviewing the integrity of the FIS's operations. This will no longer affect the results of the Olympic competition, but this must not happen again in the future; things must be handled better," says Valtasola.   The Finnish Olympic Committee supports the actions of the Ski Association.   "A clear mistake was made in the Olympic competition, which placed athletes in an unequal position. Such a significant error should be followed by more than just an apology, so we think it is good that the Ski Association is thoroughly investigating the matter with the FIS, says Janne Hänninen, Director of Elite Sports at the Olympic Committee.  
    • Triathlon WT Mixed Relay World Championships 2026   Hamburg (GER) - 12 July 2026     Official Website Programme Results System Facebook Page Discussion Thread
    • Probably there is one somewhere (not in Nice though). To be honest, French Alps have been a weak project from the start. Born out of wasted regional politicians that wanted a piece of olympic glory while Paris 2024 was still to happen. It would be fair to say that very few people cared until not so long ago. Mood is beginning to shift I think with the end of Milan (in a "shit, it's getting real" way). I beline at the end, Alpes 2030 will be okay, but with some shortcomings (like speed skating in foreign land)
    • Volleyball CEV European League added to the 2026 calendar (assigns FIVB ranking points).   Archery ranking events added to the 2026 calendar (assigns ranking points for Mixed Team Compound).
×
×
  • Create New...