Originally Posted by IntentionalButt
Now, here's a brain teaser...
Both men score knockdowns, and the action is mostly competitive otherwise.
Usually when two knockdowns are scored, people treat the round as they would any normal round - the knockdowns cancelling each other out. So whoever did better the rest of the time would get a 10-9.
The question becomes, how much does one have to really impose himself to become the 10-9 recipient in the event of a double KD? How much of a priority is it to avoid a 10-10?
Say Glass and Flamenco trade knockdowns, and if you subtract them both it would have been a "close-but-clear" 10-9 for Glass. (or one that half the people scoring saw one way, and half the other...)
Would that be an acceptable 10-10?
Of course, if Glass was dominant for 2+ minutes and they traded knockdowns it's a pretty clear-cut 10-9 to Glass...
Juice also thought the original scenario COULD go 10-10 after Drew worked his magic.
As for your scenario, which we shall dub scenario B, I'd be disinclined to give a 10-10 as I am usually able to find enough separation to score it one way or the other, right or wrong. Not there aren't any, just very few and far between.
.....how about if Glass Joe dominates to the tune of what would normally be a 10-8. How inclined, or resistant would you be to give him that 10-8 considering they traded KDs?
Or say Glass Joe dominates with what be a 10-8 round, flat out dominating, and then scores a late KD. How inclined/resistant would you be to give a 10-7 in that case. Considering that 1) the round was a whoopass round from the get go, and 2) you had already decided it would be 10-8 as the closing seconds approached, and then the KD occurred. Would you, could you score that a 10-7?