Most people dont know how to score a fight.

[trampie]

You just cant educate some people.

[GazOC]

I did try though...

[WalletInspector]

Originally Posted by GazOC

No offence, you're either dumb or you're trolling. Or maybe both...

I wish he was trolling. I think he's just a complete mong.

[Scotty321]

Originally Posted by trampie

You just cant educate some people.

[IMG]********gifsoup.com/view/275593/shock-o.gif[/IMG]

[dftaylor]

Originally Posted by bruthead

trampie is right that there is no practical difference between 9-9 and 10-10. Who gives a **** what you call it; it goes down as an even round. I scored some of those Rob Norton-Leon Williams rounds 0-0.

It makes a difference when it's not a legitimate ****ing score according to the rules and the official way to score a fight!

If a guy knocks the other down he automatically wins the round, the only debate is the margin by which he won it.

So, a round where the fighter was clearly winning prior to being knocked down could be scored against him 10-9.

A round where there was nothing in it and there was a knockdown scored would be scored 10-8.

A round where the guy was losing and knocked down would be 10-8.

This is not difficult, surely?

[Flea Man]

Originally Posted by dftaylor

So, a round where the fighter was clearly winning prior to being knocked down could be scored against him 10-9.

A round where there was nothing in it and there was a knockdown scored would be scored 10-8.

A round where the guy was losing and knocked down would be 10-8.

[dftaylor]

Originally Posted by trampie

I gave you the example of a knockdown round and you told me you would score it 10-10, i would have scored it 9-9 the rational being a knockdown equating to losing a point, there is no difference in the grand scheme of things between 9-9, 10-10 or 4-4, on a technicality it makes more sense to score it 9-9 as opposed to 10-10 but at the end of the day it makes no difference.

You scoring it even the same as me, meaning we would probably end up with the same result at the end of the day, you know that most people would score it 10-8.

Ok, let's do some scenarios here...

Fighter A and Fighter B are on even terms for a whole round. Fighter A lands a cuffing shot that plants B on his arse. He's not hurt, just off-balance. B gets up and A, in his enthusiasm to get a Sports Network stoppage special, rushes in, ends up off-balance and gets knocked down in return. A isn't hurt either.

That is an even round. 10-10. Simple. Why the **** would you start giving 9-9s when (as you admit) it makes no difference and adds complexity to what is a simple (to most people) system?

How does it make "more sense"? Why call an even round anything other than 10-10?

You are just talking nonsense. You've shown it again and again and instead of just, as Gaz recommends, shutting up and eating crow you've made a giant "I'm stupid" sign to hang over your head.

The scoring system is called the 10-point must system. You MUST give the winner ten points UNLESS they have been penalised for fouling. And technically you still give them 10, then deduct the penalty point to get 9.

You can't accuse anyone of not knowing how to score a fight when you don't even understand the scoring system!

[dftaylor]

Originally Posted by trampie

You just cant educate some people.

This is becoming abundantly clear.

[Flea Man]

Originally Posted by dftaylor

Ok, let's do some scenarios here...

Fighter A and Fighter B are on even terms for a whole round. Fighter A lands a cuffing shot that plants B on his arse. He's not hurt, just off-balance. B gets up and A, in his enthusiasm to get a Sports Network stoppage special, rushes in, ends up off-balance and gets knocked down in return. A isn't hurt either.

That is an even round. 10-10. Simple.

If both fighters have been knocked down in a round I usually just go with a 10-9 depending on who got the better of the round/'better'/cleaner knockdown etc.

For example, Martinz-P-Dub I, rnd 1. I gave that 10-9 to Sergio.

[WalletInspector]

Originally Posted by Flea Man

If both fighters have been knocked down in a round I usually just go with a 10-9 depending on who got the better of the round/'better'/cleaner knockdown etc.

For example, Martinz-P-Dub I, rnd 1. I gave that 10-9 to Sergio.

The difference between that and Taylor's scenario is that Sergio landed a f'n beautiful right hand.

[dftaylor]

Originally Posted by Flea Man

If both fighters have been knocked down in a round I usually just go with a 10-9 depending on who got the better of the round/'better'/cleaner knockdown etc.

For example, Martinz-P-Dub I, rnd 1. I gave that 10-9 to Sergio.

I was thinking of that fight actually, but removed Sergio's better shot from the equation. Agree with your scoring of that round 100%. That fight reveals my biggest issue with modern scoring - mistaking volume for effective aggression.

[trampie]

Originally Posted by dftaylor

If a guy knocks the other down he automatically wins the round, the only debate is the margin by which he won it.

Who says 'If a guy knocks the other down he automatically wins the round', is the first question and the second question is Gaz thinks it should be a drawn round in the example given, is that right if the boxer suffering a flash knockdown has dominated the round but loses it 10-8 which happens in practice or even loses the round 10-9, Gaz thinks it should be scored 10-10.

[dftaylor]

Originally Posted by trampie

Who says 'If a guy knocks the other down he automatically wins the round', is the first question and the second question is Gaz thinks it should be a drawn round in the example given, is that right if the boxer suffering a flash knockdown has dominated the round, Gaz thinks it should be scored 10-10.

It's subjective, I suppose. If fighter A battered the other guy completely and then got knocked down while off-balance right at the end, I could see an argument for it being a 10-10 - I just wouldn't score it that way. It would have to be a hell of a beating until the KD for me to do so.

10-9 would against fighter A would be fair in that case, IMO.

*Edit* I had a think about it. Here's how I'd answer it: if fighter A had done enough to justify a 10-8 win, prior to the flash KD, I could see a reasonable argument for a 10-10. That gives figher B credit for scoring the KD but doesn't ignore the rest of the round. However, I wouldn't score it that way.

[GazOC]

Originally Posted by trampie

Who says 'If a guy knocks the other down he automatically wins the round', is the first question and the second question is Gaz thinks it should be a drawn round in the example given, is that right if the boxer suffering a flash knockdown has dominated the round but loses it 10-8 which happens in practice or even loses the round 10-9, Gaz thinks it should be scored 10-10.

No. I said it can be scored 10-10 but it can't be scored 9-9. I can't nail down a score on a hypothetical round that I havn't seen FFS, it totally depends how how dominant the dropped fighter was.

[trampie]

Originally Posted by GazOC

No. I said it can be scored 10-10 but it can't be scored 9-9. I can't nail down a score on a hypothetical round that I havn't seen FFS, it totally depends how how dominant the dropped fighter was.

A knockdown round can be scored 10-10 ok Gaz, thats your position.