Do the Fury's have glass jaws?

That was a bogus KD for Paul yesterday. You can maybe make an argument for a balance issue because of a punch but Tommy was neither hurt nor it was a flash KD. Absolute BS in my opinion.

 

Not to mention a signature to fight KO artist Haye (who pulled out x2), a 4 rounder against 22 year old power puncher Price at 17 and no stoppage defeats in 70-odd fights amateur and pro. How many heavyweights have as many fights against and as much proven willingness to take on massive punching KO artists as Fury?

Hughie also seems to have a sturdy chin and even Tommy can boast to have survived the proven MMA KO assassin Jake Paul!

 

Which was started by the jab...without the jab, the chain reaction of event leading him to the canvas wouldn't have happened.

 

Huh? You don't have to be hurt for a KD to count. The JP jab was the reason why the whole chain of events started.

It was a legit knockdown. Anytime a punch cause any part of an opponents body to touch the canvas...it's a legit knockdown.

 

You've no idea what a glass jaw is, nor what is a knockout, nor what a dodgy referee is, nor that a knockdown doesn't necessarily means you're hurt.

 

Lol I've just had a look at this fruit loops posting history ,congratulations in joining Herrol Gee on ignore, two on ignore in sixteen years should tell you the level you're posting at .

 

Yep. But the guy is more of a troll.

I think it was a light punch at the right moment which took Tommy off balance, so I'd call it a knockdown, but one that only gives you a point advantage, but not the one like "I hurt him" - not at all, Paul lost the round, I see it as 9:9.

 

You're calling me a troll but scoring/seeing it as a 9-9 round? You must be kiddin dude. There are no 9-9 rounds without point deductions in pro boxing. You must be a troll.

 

You need to read more carefully. I said in the best case Fury was knocked off balance and then it was a KD. But i don't think that is the case here.

I think he lost the balance because his leg touched Jakes. That was the reason why Tommy protested in the first place. If it was just the punch that knocked him off balance i would agree. But i think the combination of punch and stepping on Jakes foot is the reason why he went down. I don't think the punch alone would have knocked him down. So for me its a bogus KD in favor of the guy who was the clear A side and even got one ridiculous biased scorecard in his favor.

There is plenty of footage where you can see that Tommy was taking a step forward in the same moment Jake threw the punch and he stepped on Jakes foot while the punch landed and that was the reason why he lost balance.

 

1. I wasn't calling you a troll, but the author of the topic
2. I agree with you by quoting your post
3. Yes, 9-9 is only in case you win the round, but get point deduction. The 10 points scoring system has some imperfections: how do you score a round where one guy is knocked down, but otherwise dominates the round - must be 10-10 which is practically the same if you score it 9-9, but I am not sorry for disturbing you or "kiddin" you when you got it all wrong.

 

Lol. No. If one guy dominates a round but gets knocked down in the last seconds it's a 10-9 for the guy who scored the KD. Not 10-10.

I know the 10-9 must system is BS but it is what it is. It was a 10-9 for Fury until the ref called it a KD which made it a 10-8 for Paul. Could have been scored as a 10-9 Paul i guess but I still disagree with the call and i explained why in another post.

 

Nah, I know the rules negates the two knockdowns, as a knockdown is generally one point deduction, so I knock you down and you're -1, but you do the same and I become -1 and since it's a 10-points must (except in case of a point deduct), the round is even - 10-10 (which for the end result is like it's 9-9, just both of us will have one point less in our totals). The rules allow 10-10 if no round winner or 10-8 with a great domination without a knockdown, but for some reasons those are rarely seen.

You say the knockdown shouldn't have to be ruled as such. I have to review the moment, but whatever, this knockdown brought nothing to Jake as even the high bias towards him (and the crap scorecard, as you say) he lost and was outclassed even, had plenty of punches to his head. Another thing I don't like about the knockdowns, it isn't a case from this fight, but whatever, is when a guy clearly is falling back out of balance, but got the chance to hang on the ropes, so his *ss or arms never touch the canvas - very often those cases aren't ruled as a knockdown, but I believe they should be.

 

If two guys score a knockdown in one round, the round is scored 10-9 for the guy who is doing better overall. So no 10-10 either. 10-10 rounds are IMO just for some feel out rounds where basically nothing lands. As you said it's a rare thing and rightfully so IMO albeit i have to say i would rather see a lot more 10-10s than just giving the A-side a 10-9 for no reason if he does next to nothing.

And the thing about ropes protecting fighters from knockdowns: That's just bad refereeing. The rules are clear. If the ropes holding you but you would go down otherwise, it's a KD.

 

Here's the tricky part: you can score an even round, it's far from impossible to be a draw - they score entire fight as such, but impossible for a round? Having those rules with gaps in their logic, it doesn't seem there's even a discussion over improving them (or do something adequate about the upper weight classes).

 

The problem isn't the system. Or the rules. The problem is how judges and also refs translate those rules into fights. We need better refs and better judges first and foremost. I mean look at MMA. You can say what you want about MMA but the scoring system and the judging and also refereeing is a lot better overall & in general.