In boxing, the role of officiating has always been a source of intense debate, particularly in high-profile matches where the outcomes hinge on a few closely contested rounds. Controversial scoring and refereeing decisions have led to accusations of bias, incompetence, or even corruption, casting a shadow over the sport’s integrity. In recent years, several major boxing bouts have ended in controversy, leaving fans and pundits questioning whether the fight was truly won by the better fighter, or if it was, in fact, decided by the judges.
Boxing, unlike other sports, is inherently subjective when it goes to the scorecards. While knockouts leave no room for doubt, decisions made by judges rely on their interpretation of what they’ve seen during the fight. Judges are tasked with evaluating criteria such as clean punching, effective aggression, defense, and ring generalship. However, the way each judge weighs these elements can vary greatly, leading to significant discrepancies in scorecards.
Even with the standardized 10-point must system, where the winner of each round receives 10 points and the loser 9 or fewer, controversies arise when scorecards seem disconnected from the action that unfolded in the ring.
One of the most discussed cases of recent years was the first bout between Tyson Fury and Deontay Wilder in December 2018. The fight ended in a split-decision draw, with one judge scoring it 115–111 for Wilder, another 114–112 for Fury, and the third 113–113.
The controversy stemmed from the fact that many fans and boxing experts believed Fury had outboxed Wilder for most of the fight. Despite Wilder’s two knockdowns of Fury, including a dramatic 12th-round knockdown that nearly ended the fight, Fury appeared to control the majority of the rounds with superior boxing skills. The split-decision draw led to widespread criticism, with some accusing the judges of favoring Wilder’s power punches over Fury’s technical dominance. This fight exemplified how differing criteria, especially in close fights, can lead to contentious outcomes.
Another high-profile controversy occurred in the first fight between Canelo Álvarez and Gennady Golovkin in 2017. The match was ruled a split draw, but the scorecards immediately drew scrutiny. Judge Adalaide Byrd’s 118–110 score in favor of Álvarez was particularly controversial, as most observers believed Golovkin had done enough to win. The other two judges scored the bout 115–113 for Golovkin and 114–114, further adding to the confusion over how Byrd had seen the fight so differently.
Fans and commentators pointed to this fight as an example of how judging controversies can taint a great boxing contest. While the rematch between Álvarez and Golovkin eventually happened, the shadow of the questionable scorecard in their first fight still lingers, with many questioning the fairness of the scoring process in boxing.
One of the most shocking decisions in recent boxing history occurred in February 2022, when Josh Taylor retained his undisputed light-welterweight titles with a highly controversial split-decision win over Jack Catterall. Many ringside observers and boxing analysts felt that Catterall had done more than enough to win the fight, with his cleaner punches and ring control, especially in the early rounds.
The aftermath of this fight was explosive, with widespread condemnation of the scoring. Even Taylor himself seemed taken aback by the outrage that followed, although he maintained that he believed he had done enough to win. This fight reignited calls for reforms in boxing’s scoring system, with some suggesting that additional oversight or the inclusion of more judges might help reduce the likelihood of such controversies.
Referees, while less directly involved in scoring, also play a critical role in close boxing matches. Refereeing controversies often center around decisions to stop a fight too early or too late, point deductions for fouls, or failure to penalize fighters for illegal actions. In close bouts, these decisions can have a profound impact on the final result.
For instance, in a 2021 fight between Vasyl Lomachenko and Teofimo Lopez, some argued that the referee should have been more active in warning Lopez for excessive clinching, which disrupted Lomachenko’s rhythm. While Lopez won the fight on points, some questioned whether more stringent officiating might have changed the dynamic of the match.
In recent years, boxing has continued to see its fair share of controversial decisions that have led fans to question the fairness of the sport. Whether it’s split decisions, bizarre scorecards, or refereeing that seems inconsistent, the impact of officiating in close matches is undeniable. While subjective judging will always be a part of the sport, there is a growing call for greater transparency and accountability in how judges score fights. Without significant reforms, boxing risks alienating its fanbase, as more and more viewers come to believe that fights are not being decided solely by the fighters in the ring.
