This is in regard to the Hall vs. Ward fight that took place today. Only went two rounds and was stopped due to a headbutt. Was it a 'draw' because the judges scored it one round a piece? Or do they have some rule where they call it a draw if it doesn't get past a certain round regardless? I just thought if it didn't get to a certain round in the fight, it was a 'no contest' Calling it a 'draw' seems odd, unless the rounds were scored evenly between the fighters.
It does seem bizarre, it seems to me that its exactly like a NC because as they were reading out the result they said it was because it had finished less than 4 rounds. Should have just called it a NC as it used to be called.
Different commissions have different rules. Some would call that a No Contest, others a Technical Draw. I agree that a No Contest sounds more appropriate for putting on the record.
That is a British thing. Many situations where a "no contest" would make the most sense are deemed "technical draws" in the UK. Then you have nonsense like Paul Edwards vs. Shinny Bayaar, where a clear No Contest is actually deemed a TKO1. atsch (or had...to be fair, they did change the rule that was responsible for that result and many similar prior travesties...but unfortunately not in time for Bayaar to avoid having a ridiculous unearned TKO loss on his record...)
Does it just depend on where the fight is held as to what they call it? I'm guessing it's different depending on where the fight is taking place. It'd be nice to have rules that were more across-the-board. Boxing is so scattered in so many different ways.
IB, is there any credence to the idea that each fighter won a round on all of the judges' scorecards and that's why they called it a draw, or does that even matter? Also, how far would the bout have to go into the 4th round for it to NOT be ruled a 'technical draw'?
No, that has nothing to do with it. For the British, "technical draw" is basically another way of saying "no contest". It has nothing to do with evenly split points like normal draws. (or normal technical draws in the rest of the world, after the completion of the agreed-upon minimum # of rounds...)
That commission has decided it makes more sense to say that a fight did occur and took its natural course but that there was no real winner or loser, hence a draw. A commission who rules it a No Contest is essentially saying the brevity of the fight combined with the outcome makes it as though the fight was essentially "cancelled." I favor the latter.
Do you know how far into the 4th round a fight has to go for it to still be considered a technical draw?
Well in normal places the fourth has to be completed (all three minutes, final bell rung) for it to be considered a real contest subject to scoring. I'm not exactly sure about the British rules.
