If a boxer completely dominates a round but suffers a KD, how should the round be scored?

Scroll up.

 

Scroll up. It's all there.

 

If fighter A is clearly winning a round handily but gets knockdown in a fashion where he really isn't hurt, I score the round even.

If he's winning it clearly but fighter B was still somewhat competive, I might score it 10-9 for the fighter that scored the knockdown.
Anything other than that its 10-8 for the fighter who scored the knockdown.

Then sometimes there are rare circumstances where fighter A is so dominating a round and putting fighter B in a situation where it looks like he's ready to get stopped, I'm mean just battering him from pillar to post to the point that if he makes it out of the round its a 10-8 to fighter A even without scoring a knockdown.
In such a circumstance if fighter A is deserving of a 10-8 round without a knockdown but he himself suffers a flash knockdown in the process, I may lean to score the round 10-9 to fighter A here, an otherwise 10-8 round scored 10-9 because he was dropped.
(I just shake my head when such a round occurs and one or more judges turn a 10-8 round for fighter A and score it 10-8 for fighter B.
A 4 point swing over a flash knockdown that in no way hurt fighter A.)

 

A knock down gives the downed opponent time to recover, and the rules prevent the other fighter from continuing his onslaught during that time. Else a lot of fights would be over if the downed opponent was still getting hit whilst down or when he/she is trying to get back up. So 10-8 is fair.

Watch some older fights such as Dempsey vs Willard and you'll see him standing over his opponent and laying into him as he tries to stand back up.

 

IB, most of us get the 10 point must system, but let me just ad that imo I think its a flawed system when it comes to tabulating and scoring knockdowns in a round.
A lot of judges just score a round 10-8 for the fighter who scored a knockdown, no matter how the round was being played out. Just dumb and unfair imo.

Imo a better way to score knockdowns is just deduct a point for each knockdown to the fighter who went down.
Just score the round as you would as if no knockdowns have occurred and then deduct points for each knockdown suffered.
If the scoring rules were implemented this way, I think you'd find a good percentage of rounds where knockdowns occurred scored 10-9 and 10-10 instead of the usual 10-8 round for a fighter scoring a knockdown.
……..and under a system that would deduct a point for each knockdown scored, you'd still find a lot of rounds where only one knockdown occurred scored 10-8, which would mean the fighter won the round and scored a knockdown in the process.

 

Wow.

That is sooooo patronising and your last paragraph is actually insulting.

My previous posts actually address each point you have made and there's not a great deal more I can do except repeat them which is unnecessary because you can just scroll up instead.

 

I agree with everything you say except the part about scoring the round 10 - 8 which seems unrelated to the rest of the post..

I don't see how giving an opponent time to recover and all the things that go with it; a mandatory 8 count, asking the fighter if he's OK, the opponent going to a neutral corner (all of which I agree with) means the round should be scored 10 - 8.

The link provided by another member in one of the earlier posts says that a round does not have to be scored 10 - 8 in the event of a knockdown which supports what I said in my first post in this thread.

 

If a guy is already winning the round 10-9 but the other guy all of a sudden makes up that point lost by scoring a knockdown than 9-8 for the guy making up the point lost but if the guy was being dominated so bad than a draw is legit because you don't need a knockdown to score two points it's just mandatory when scoring a knockdown but two points can be awarded even without a knockdown therefore I'm right and you're just a casual so go learn boxing

 

How do you figure a 10-9 for fighter A all of a sudden becomes 9-8 for fighter B?

Is your rationale that you're taking two points off of fighter A for suffering the knockdown thus his 10 becomes an 8?

 

you don't make sense nor do you understand so go look it up in the rules of boxing because I'm right and I know I'm right and I don't argue over something I know to be fact so go look it up

 

10 point must means a fighter must get ten points unless he's lost the round or had a deduction.

10-8 for a knockdown in a round a fighter was gonna lose is very subjective, as is scoring in the first place.

I struggle to think of times when I would score a kd round 10-9. I think I only ever would if I felt the round was already 10-8 to the winning fighter prior to the knockdown.

Like say Ortiz vs Wilder round 7 in the 1st fight.

But I do give close rounds a big swing when a knockdown occurs as its fundamental in boxing that knocking your opponent down is a big reward.

 

I'm asking a simple question on how you turned a 10-9 round for fighter A and scored it 9-8 for fighter B, really a simple question that obviously you don't want to answer for the simple reason you're just going about this thread to serve as s troll.

 

Ok thanks for the explanation. I didn't know it would go back to 10-10

 

I can understand giving an otherwise close round a big swing to a 10-8, the rationale being that the knockdown itself tipped the actual scoring of that round in the favor of the fighter scoring the knockdown, plus you're going to reward him an extra point for the knockdown scored.
You can also rationale that the hard connect tipped the round in his favor and the fact that the opponent went down gives the fighter the extra point difference.

I cant think of the names because they weren't in high profile fights, but I've actually scored rounds 10-9 to the fighter that got knockdown.
Watch round 7 of Marquez vs Barrera. Marquez was completely dominating MAB and hitting him with hard combinations at will.
My nindset in watching the closing of that round was that I was going to give Marquez a 10-8 round if MAB made it to the bell.
Well right before the end of the round, Marquez walked into a MAB right hand that made Marquez' glove touch the canvas.
The referee Jay Nady mistakenly ruled it a slip, and then deducted a point from MAB because he hit Marquez on the head while Marquez was down.
Because of Nady's mistake I ended up scoring the roung 10-7 for Marquez.

Had Nady correctly ruled it a knockdown, I would have scored that round 10-8 Marquez. Actually my scoring of the round would have been 10-9 Marquez, but since MAB was deducted a point for hitting Marquez while he was down, my scoring turns into 10-8.

If Nady had credited MAB with the knockdown, and the round had ended right there without MAB hitting Marquez while he was down, I would have scored that round 10-9 Marquez.
Since my actual scoring of the round without the knockdown would have been 10-8 Marquez, the one punch flash knockdown to me just makes the round closer to a 10-9. In other words I'm rewarding MAB with a point for scoring that knockdown.

So many people including the HBO boxing team was ready to turn that round into a 10-8 round to MAB if Nady had ruled it correctly and credited MAB with the knockdown.
A 10-8 round for Marquez scored 10-8 MAB because of a flash knockdown.

A knockdown should only really count for one point, not 4.