Judging the Judges: Harold Lederman!

July 2, 2007

By Tom Schreck

Photo: HBO

Welcome to the FightNews.com feature, "Judging the Judges"-- conversations about the state of judging with championship judge Tom Schreck and some of boxing's biggest media names.

In this second installment, Tom and Harold Lederman - HBO's "Unofficial Official" - talk about the sport and kick around some of judging's more controversial issues.

Lederman has been with HBO since 1986 and in 33 years as a judge, he has scored more than 100 world championship prizefights on six continents. At HBO, he has scored more than 560 fights in his twenty years on the air. In October 1997, he was inducted into the World Boxing Hall of Fame in Los Angeles on the 30th anniversary of his appointment as a boxing judge.

A graduate of Columbia University, Lederman is a registered New York pharmacist, who has been in practice since 1982. Lederman is an inductee in the Rockland County, New York Sports Hall of Fame. He is also the first recipient of the Marvin Goldberg Memorial Award for outstanding achievement in boxing from the Max Kase Sports Lodge of B'nai B'rith.

Lederman was honored on May 5 in Las Vegas with the Boxing Writers of America Association's "Good Guy" Award.

How would assess the state of judging in our sport today?

There's nothing wrong with the judging and there's nothing wrong with the judges. The problem is with how the judges are assigned. Think of the Super Bowl and how the officials are assigned to that game. They don't do it by state or sanctioning body or where a guy lives-they pick the four best guys. I don't know, maybe the problem is the states want to keep the money for themselves or something but we got to get the four best guys doing the fight.

How would you pick the four best guys?

I wouldn't be that hard. You look at the guys with the most experience and give the experienced guys the important fights and let the guys just starting out do the four-rounders.

Couldn't you make the argument that the most experienced guys aren't always the most competent?

Well, yeah, but you separate out the guys who are good and the guys who aren't so good. It's not complicated; it's not rocket science. It's that simple.

What do you think gives judges the most trouble?

Well, I can't talk for anybody else - and I don't know about you Tom - but I struggle the most when you got two guys holding and not punching or even one guy holding. They hold and they throw a punch and then they're back to holding-it's very difficult to evaluate. It gets difficult to assess who's landing more or who is landing the harder and cleaner punches in that situation.

For me, the most challenging situation is a hard slugging puncher against a crafty boxer. It gets very difficult to assess a number of jabs over a far less but harder power shots. I judged the Casamayor - Kid Diamond (a.k.a. Almazbek Raiymkulov) fight that you called (for HBO) and the three of us* had the score three different ways. *Editor's Note: Casamayor and Raiymkulov fought to a draw June 11, 2005. Judge Bill Costello scored the bout 111-116 for Raiymkulov; Judge Luis Rivera scored the fight a draw at 114-114; Judge Tom Schreck scored the contest 115-112 in the favor of Casamayor.

Well, Joel Casamayor is always controversial. Often it is because he spends half of the time looking at the other guy and not doing anything.

He can be very effective.

Sure-when he fights. But he's always controversial and he's always going to be controversial because he just doesn't stay busy.

Where do you come down on opening scoring?

It's a horrible idea. I really don't think it's good at all. I'm worried that when they start seeing the scores judges will start trying to catch up and then you got guys mixing things up and scoring inconsistently and doing things in different ways. You don't want a judge scoring things differently over the course of the same fight.

How about using the ten point must system more liberally and scoring more 10-8 and 10-7 rounds?

You could do it now. There's nothing against doing it now. You could give more 10-8s and 10-7s. It could be implemented. I have nothing against that.

But the commissions mostly discourage that...

Yeah, but they could change that and I don't think there's anything in the rulebook against doing that. The thing is boxing changes too slowly. You know, we thought we had things cleared up a bit with the unified championship rules. Then, there I was over in Cardiff and they went back to the WBC rules during that fight and someone got an accidental head butt and there was a point deducted because that's the WBC rules. There are different rules and they are junky and it doesn't make any sense. There's no standardization at all in our sport and we could really do that.

What do you think about analysts criticizing the judges' scoring?

Well, you don't hear much about that. Sometimes Teddy (Atlas) will scream about things. I don't think Jim and Larry complain about it.

Do you think the TV guys look for controversy-even when it's not there?

No, no, no not at all. I think they call it the way they see it. They express to the public what is happening.

Do you think judges have favorite boxing styles that they are more likely to give points to?

You know I've heard people talk about that but I haven't actually seen it. I don't hear things like: "That Tom Schreck really prefers body punchers and so you have to think about that." I've heard about it but I've never really experienced it.

Are you able to enjoy a fight while you're scoring it for HBO or does the concentration you have to use interfere with you enjoying it.

Sure I do-I love it. I concentrate on it and enjoy it at the same time.

How long has it been since you officially judged and do you miss it?

I got out of it in 2001. I do miss it. Once you get it in your blood it's hard not to.

Your daughter Julie is a championship judge. How did she get involved and have you called fights that she worked?

Julie and I would watch fights when she was growing up and she always enjoyed scoring them. Then she worked her way through the amateurs to where she is now. I've done about a dozen of her fights and our scores usually agree.

What would you change in boxing?

I really wish judges and referees were appointed in different ways. The way the states and the sanctioning bodies assign things really bothers me. The other thing you hear a lot about is weight classes and that there's too many. I don't agree and I certainly wouldn't get rid of any weight divisions. I think they are just fine. I don't know if there's much I would change right now.

Recently, Teddy Atlas got really upset at a referee because he thought a fighter was taking unnecessary punishment. He started yelling at the referee to stop the fight. Have you ever been tempted to do the same thing?

Oh, it is definitely tempting. I was ringside when Jimmy Garcia died and Leavander Johnson died. I mean you always want to do something. I have a headset on so I really can't. I'd love to take the headset off and go talk to the doctor. I wouldn't yell at the referee, I'd talk to the doctor. Doctors are too slow in getting involved in fights. It is definitely tempting.

* * *

Tom Schreck is a judge with New York State and the WBA. His boxing murder mystery "On The Ropes: A Duffy Dombrowski Mystery" debuts September 2007. For more info, vist www.TomSchreck.com or e-mail Tom here.