Fury vs Usyk Could See Six Judges Used to Avoid a Controversial Result

ByIan Shutts
Tyson Fury closing as betting favorite to beat Oleksandr Usyk in February fight

It would be fair to say that boxing is a sport still bedevilled by contentious points decisions.

Sometimes fights are so close that they naturally end in margin calls from the judges, and other times the decisions are so downright bizarre you wonder what bout they were actually watching.

Tyson Fury has been the recipient of what some pundits labelled a lucky escape against Francis Ngannou in a split-decision win back in October 2023, with the Cameroon MMA star landing more power punches and dumping the Gypsy King on the canvas.

Boxing chiefs want to avoid any similar controversy in the future, which is why a move to have six judges at ringside – rather than the traditional three – has been mooted.

And Fury’s undisputed heavyweight clash with Oleksandr Usyk in May could be the first fight governed by the new ruling.

Six of the Best

The Fury vs Usyk odds explain why having expert judges at ringside is so vital for this historic contest – the Ukrainian is the narrowest of -125 favorites in what is effectively a 50/50 scrap.

The Paddy Power boxing odds also reveal that a points decision in favor of either man is by far and away the most likely outcome, with Usyk never being stopped but perhaps lacking the punch power to land a KO victory himself.

Therefore, it’s highly probable that one of the biggest heavyweight fights of the past 25 years will go to the scorecards – ramping up the pressure on the judges to get it right.

The idea behind having six judges is that 12 eyes are better than half a dozen, with the ‘wisdom of the crowd’ more likely to yield the ‘right’ result – rather than one judge, having a bad night at the office, effectively skewing the outcome.

A Thin Line

The idea has been presented by World Boxing Council president, Mauricio Sulaiman, who has been critical of the number of split or majority points decisions that have been awarded in recent times.

Boxing chiefs want clearer, more transparent decision-making in the sport – warding off the threat of conspiracy theories and questions of judging integrity. As Sulaiman himself says, “having three judges creates a very thin line between the right result and catastrophe. This is about the biggest fight in history, and controversy would be so damaging.”

It’s of course possible that the Fury vs Usyk fight will be so close that a draw, or a thin decision either way, will ultimately be the outcome whether there were six judges or 60. What we do know is that a rematch – barring a one-sided knockout – is likely anyway.

Anthony Joshua, who despatched Ngannou with ease back in March, awaits the winner, but he might just have a wait on his hands if Fury vs Usyk is as close as the sportsbooks expect it to be.

At least the chances of an outright draw will be lessened with six judges watching on…

Hit and Run

As recently as early April we saw another calamitous judges’ decision when Richardson Hitchins was handed a bizarre unanimous win over Gustavo Lemos in Las Vegas.

Hitchins acted as the spoiler throughout the IBF welterweight eliminator, repeatedly clinching, holding, and running from the unbeaten Argentine.

Quite what the judges saw in his performance only they can say, but they handed the American victory – one scorecard had Hitchins ahead by a remarkable 117-111 margin.

The response of Devin Haney, considered by many to be the best lightweight on the planet, perhaps tells its own story.

Even so, given that the other two judges scored it 115-113 to Hitchins, even six judges would unlikely have saved boxing from another embarrassing scoring gaffe.

Similar Posts