Columnist Dean Juipe: D.C. fights prove open scoring fails

Dean Juipe

Monday, April 26, 1999 | 10:29 a.m.

Dean Juipe's column appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. His boxing notebook appears Thursday. Reach him at juipe@lasvegassun.com or 259-4084.

If he had it to do over, Bob Arum would probably yell just as much today as he did Friday when he tried to talk the Nevada State Athletic Commission into adopting open scoring on a trial basis for a May 8 boxing card at the Las Vegas Hilton.

The heated approach, is, after all, almost a personality trait for Arum. He drives a hard bargain and he obviously feels a little bluster occasionally adds to his argument.

Yet the NSAC was not only far from impressed, it took a chillingly cold reception to the proposal.

Strongly worded or not, and animated or not, Arum found influencing the commission on the subject of open scoring -- a practice in which the judges' scores are made public after each round, rather than at the end of a fight that's decided by decision -- to be fruitless. Not one of the four NSAC members present at the City Hall meeting showed as much as token interest in open scoring on even an experimental basis.

Arum had the good manners to thank the NSAC for listening to his spiel, yet he left disappointed and viewed the panelists who rejected him as dinosaurs.

But the commission did the right thing and the almost indisputable evidence it needed for support was provided Saturday night in Washington.

There, on a card being televised by Showtime, open scoring was utilized and it negatively influenced two of the three featured fights.

In the main event, WBA junior welterweight champ Sharmba Mitchell built up a slight lead over challenger Reggie Green and then ran out the clock. Knowing he had the fight won if he didn't get knocked out, Mitchell hightailed it around the ring during the 11th and 12th rounds rather than take a chance on exchanging blows with Green.

"The public was robbed of a good finish," lamented Green's manager, Harold Weston. "Sharmba did nothing in the last two rounds. Open scoring is just a bad situation."

Earlier that evening, an equally glaring example of open scoring's inherent weakness presented itself when Mark Johnson won the vacant IBF junior bantamweight title despite the fact he coasted through the final four rounds against Ratanachai Vorapin. After eight rounds, Johnson knew he was far enough ahead that he didn't have to fight -- so he didn't.

"Why should I go out there and take any chances?" he told the Associated Press. "If I'd have gotten into a war after the eighth round, I could have been hurt and maybe lost the fight."

He didn't need to say any more. Open scoring is a minus, not a plus, and it doesn't address the greater problem of incompetent officials handling prize fights in almost every state except Nevada.

Nevertheless, Arum's promotional rival, Don King, came out Sunday and said he favored open scoring in spite of what happened in D.C. a night earlier.

What is it with these guys? Arum and King hardly agree on anything, yet they're blood brothers when it comes to the ridiculous idea that open scoring is good for boxing.

Maybe they're just using it as a diversion. After all, on Arum's Saturday card in Albuquerque, undefeated Johnny Tapia -- getting paid $125,000 -- knocked out Alberto Martinez -- a 45-23-2 fighter who was being paid $3,000 -- in the first round.

Asking people to pay for mismatches like that is a far bigger problem for boxing.