No, a KO is not losing by injury. A KO is a KO. A TKO is a ref stopping too much punishment that would lead to a KO. Cuts are not a TKO.
So there's no difference by winning by cuts and by an actual TKO victory? Lewis was lucky, and thus the victory should be changed to Lewis Cuts 6.
Loss by brutal KO punch= loss by injury(injury is concussion) Loss by terrible cuts caused by punches=loss by injury(injury being cuts) There is no distinction and should be none.
Nope, Klitschko has never been knocked down, never been dominated by a series of punches, or lost a fight by decision. Thus, he never lost in a true way.
He lost by TKO from Lewis, a stoppage from a cut caused by a punch which in turn dissallows him to continue is a technical knock out (TKO). Lewis TKO6 Klitschko
Loss by a series of punches- TKO Loss by falling down and out- KO Loss by cuts- Cuts There should be a distinction because Vitali was simply winning, and a TKO or KO victory looks like he really lost in a true fashion, but in reality he lost because he was unluckily cut near the eye.
There should be a distinction, end of story. If a fan from the outside saw Lewis TKO6 they would assume that Lewis was dominating the 6th round which led to the ref jumping in and saving Vitali. However, that's far from the truth. In reality Lewis was saved by the doctor jumping in.
How can that be said about anything? A punch knocking down someone is not lucky at all, a punch causing a cut that ends the fight is lucky 100% of the time. Boxers don't train for cutting the other opponent so they can win the fight since cutting someone is a total fluke, but they do train to land a hard punch to win the fight.