By Marc Ratner: Executive Director, Nevada State Athletic Commission
Prior to every fight card, no matter how small or large, we have a Pre-Fight meeting. Our officials, including the judges, referees, doctors, and timekeepers, are required to arrive 45 minutes before the first bout. The inspectors arrive a minimum of ninety minutes before fight time. I pass out the schedule for the night and the judges’ assignments. The meeting lasts about 5-10 minutes. It includes where the officials should sit when not working and our upcoming fight card schedule.
The Post-Fight meeting deals with what happened during the night. Everyone on the commission is present. At this time the officials are paid by the commission. I introduce any visiting officials and any sanctioning body supervisors or officers. We then proceed to a critique. I begin with referees. They are asked to come to the front of the group and discuss how they handled their fight. This includes why points were or were not taken away, how fighters were cautioned, and the stoppage. We bring up possible alternative ways of handling various situations. These meetings are not adversarial, but are a learning experience for us all. It is of the utmost importance for all the officials to be “on the same page,” and these meetings set the standard.
A prime example was the Zab Judah-Kostya Tzsyu bout. Referee Jay Nady waved off the count after Zab reeled about in the ring. Zab then decided to put his gloves up to Jay’s throat. Jay talked about what he saw before and after the knock-down. Subsequently, at an in-person hearing, the Nevada State Athletic Commission suspend Zab for six months, and he was fined $75,000 for his indiscretion.
We then turn to the judges’ critique. Each judge stands up, addresses the group in reference to their scoring. Of most interest are the one-sided rounds without a knockdown and whether or not those rounds should have been scored a 10-8. An other scenario is the round where fighter “A” is winning the round and is knocked down in the last 30 seconds by fighter “B.” Our philosophy is to score those rounds 10-9 for fighter “B.”
Lastly, the doctors speak about the cuts as well as the relationship between the doctor and referee in reference to stopping a fight. Any issues of timekeeping and problems the inspectors might have had in the dressing room or during the fight are brought up for discussion.
We have been having these Post-Fight Critiques for over ten years. We maintain and try to improve upon our philosophy of scoring and referring by learning from each and every bout. In this manner, consistency, fairness and safety is maintained.
Marc Ratner started as an Inspector for the Nevada State Athletic Commission in 1985. He became Chief Inspector in 1987. With the ultimate passing of Chuck Minker, Marc became Executive Director in 1993.
Marc Ratner resides in Las Vegas, Nevada. He has been with the Nevada State Athletic Commission for over seventeen years. Mr. Ratner was appointed by the Nevada State Athletic Commission in 1992 to serve as Executive Director. Although he is the Nevada State Athletic Commission’s Executive Director, all of the views, opinions, and/or recommendations contained herein are solely his own and do not necessarily reflect those of Nevada’s Commission. All readers are strongly cautioned that the information contained herein is not intended to, and never should, substitute for the necessity of seeking the advice of a qualified medical, legal, or financial professional whenever a boxer or his/her representatives have specific questions regarding the best course of action that a boxer should take. Furthermore, since it is possible that general information herein may pertain only to a law, regulation, rule or acceptable standard of practice for a particular jurisdiction, a boxer or his/her representatives must always inquire with the appropriate licensing jurisdiction to determine the applicable laws, regulations, rules, and acceptable standards of practice for each jurisdiction.
All readers are advised that the information herein is intended solely as a general reference source, and to the fullest extent permitted by law, the information is provided “AS IS” without any warranties of any kind, whether express or implied, including without limitation, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement. No one may rely on the accuracy, integrity, quality or completeness of the general information herein. Accordingly, neither the authors, editors nor anyone else affiliated with this website may be held liable for damages of any kind whatsoever allegedly caused or resulting from any such claimed reliance.
affiliated with this website may be held liable for damages of any kind whatsoever allegedly caused or resulting from any such claimed reliance.