The 10 point must system

Maybe this will help clear things up a little

https://www.ringtv.com/122349-when-does-a-knock-down-not-result-in-a-10-8-round/

 

You are correct to a degree but they would lose 10-9

https://www.ringtv.com/122349-when-does-a-knock-down-not-result-in-a-10-8-round/

 

not a bad thing

 

This example doesn't really relate to what we are talking about, more about the perpetual gray area that has always surrounded the scoring of knock downs. Boxing authorities have never addressed this and it could be resolved by using simple mathematics. Score the rd the way you normally would and deduct 1 pt for each kd. Make it a universal guideline and put an end to this non stop controversy that has always existed. Years ago if you scored a kd you would always win a rd 10-8 regardless of what happened in the rest of the rd then the WBC got it half right by ruling that if you got kd but won the rest of the rd you could pull back a pt and lose the rd 10-9. The guy who got kd hasn't really had a pt added because he started with 10 and lost 1 for the kd then won the rd otherwise so his score of 9 is correct. The guy scoring the kd but losing the rd and ending up with 10 didn't so much have a pt added but more like failed to have a point taken away. The logical and mathematical way to score this rd is 9 pts apiece. You have to give the WBC some credit for at least trying to do something about the kd scoring but they are still only half way there although as far as I know ahead of any other commission. The Pac Cotto fight was a WBC and WBO which why you had two 10-9 scores.

 

I thought I read you would give the boxer who dominated the round but got cleanly knocked down the round. That is a 10-9 round to the guy that didn't go down however if you give the round to the opponent that means you are giving two more points than permissible under that scenario.


If you scored that way when you started out you would not progress past the amateurs or undercards on the pro's - complaints would roll in. IMO that's why all judges should have to prove themselves in the AM's, have first aid and be subject to physical before being allowed to progress to a pro licence for state, nationals then world.

 

I thought when the ref takes a point that is deducted at the very end?

 

Whilst you can sympathise protect yourself at all times has worked so far.

 

He's right actually.

Also "The factor" is pretty much the closest thing we have a boxing historian on this board. I have literally never seen him be wrong about anything in regards to topics like this.

 

I mean, it is deducted for that ROUND. You score on a round by round basis. You don't just subtract a random point at the end of the fight. You tally each round's points together for your score at the end. Adding or subtracting a point at the end disrupts the scoring process because it makes the rounds not exist in a vacuum anymore. Very awkward.

 

Ultimately, boxing became a mess when fights to the finish ended.

 

You are 100% correct. Judges are given separate scoring cards for each rd of the fight. On each card the judge will put the name of each boxer, the rd # the score for each boxer and his signature. There is also a box for pts deducted for each boxer. If there is a pt or pts deducted the judge will record those pts in the deduction box without deducting from the score he has given each boxer. He will hand the card to the ref at the end of the rd who then hands the 3 cards to the supervisor or collator who then records the scores of all 3 judges on a single sheet. This is the judges score sheet we sometimes see posted. If there is a pt deducted it will be noted and calculated in that rd by the collator.
I saw someone here say a judge could ignore a kd which was either weak or scored by being off balance. This is incorrect. A judge is compelled to deduct a pt every time the ref puts a count on a boxer regardless of whether it was a flash kd or whether the ref has erred in calling a slip a kd or for whatever reason. If the ref counts you take a point.

 

He just said said that you can't have a 10-9 round in which both fighters scored a knockdown even though THAT IS EXACTLY HOW THAT SITUATION IS SCORED AND THERE ARE COUNTLESS EXAMPLES OF THIS SCORING PROTOCOL IN PRACTICE.

He's completely wrong and your opinion of how often he's wrong has no ****ing bearing on that.

 

You award the fighter who did the best in that round 10 points and his opponent gets 9 points. Points are deducted after the round is scored regularly. So in the case of the dominant fighter going down it's basically 9-9. The 10 points were awarded, then the penalty was deducted.

You know what? Why do we have to give the opponent 9 points? Is it a 10/9 must system? Some of these clowns don't deserve a full 9 points.