scoring a knockdown but not winning the round ........

Ha! Nice :good

 

if i am factually wrong then link me to the rule book and i'll happily agree with you

but logically we all agree that 10/9 is a standard won round
and that 10/8 is usally a won round plus a KD
and that 10/7 is usually a won round plus 2 KD's
and that 10/6 is usually a won round plus 3 KD's

(there are of course other ways of reaching those score - with fouls)

so it makes sense that a KD is a one point deduction

It is the referee decision when a KD is awarded not the judges (thats the difference) - when the referee awards a KD the judges deduct a point.

9/9

 

yes and a likewise a KD can only be awarded by the referee (even if he gets it wrong - see Tyson/Holyfield - Tyson knee/glove did not touch down) if the referee awards a KD then the judges must score accordingly even if they see different. - it is the referees decision and is therefore a straight point deduction

 

The Italarican already showed you how a scorecard is filled out when a points deduction is ordered and the (different) way it is filled out when a knockdown is scored.

Various people, including myself, have given you real examples of actual rounds that match the scenario (a couple of rounds in Cunningham/Adamek, round three in Pacquiao/Cotto) where real professional judges have scored the round in the manner the correct manner, and none according to what you think should happen.

So far you have presented no evidence and no examples. So, instead of people keep jumping through hoops for you, how about you try to find one piece of evidence that supports your view. We're looking for (just one) example of a scorecard filled out by a professional boxing judge that shows a knockdown as a points deduction rather than in the standard round score. Or (just one) example of a round where a professional boxing judge has scored 9-9 without a points deduction ordered by the referee. You find just one piece of evidence that backs up your case to counter the evidence that has already been offered against and there might appear to be a semblance of a discussion to be had.

 

you can't find a link then i assume?......

My argument is based on commonsense.
and you are missing the point
find a link ....or listen carefully
a KD is a the referee's decision (not the judges) - do we agree on this at least?

so how then does the referee instruct the judges following a KD?

i assume a KD is simply classed as a foul - "touching down" - for which 1 point is deducted

therefore 9/9 or 10(-1)/9 if you like

 

What if the fighter is so dominant for every other second of the round and then gets knocked down the last second? Someone mentioned JMM-MAB before, and I remember thinking that the way Marquez was dominating could have made that round 10-8 for him until the knockdown. Would you guys ever score an even round when a fighter with a super dominant round suddenly gets clipped and floored?

 

no

 

Wow, a quarter of ESB doesn't even know how fights are scored.

 

Nope, barring him returning the KD. If a fighter is down in the round, the best that fighter can do(barring him scoring a KD) is to lose a 10-9 round.

 

Yes, this is what I'm asking for. So you think a scorecard for a round where there has been a knockdown would show 10-9 in the original score then one point in the deductions box. Find me a scorecard filled in by a professional boxing judge in this fashion. One screenshot.

Again, plenty of evidence and explanations have been presented against you. You have presented zero. Burden of evidence is on you to prove that there is a discussion here. You continually insisting you are right when you aren't is not a discussion.

 

Yes i agree, but would you agree if the KD in the MAB-JMM fight was rightfully called, and then MAB gets a point deducted for hitting JMM in the floor, the round would be scored 9-9?

 

no link?

so...... you said "A knockdown is considered by the judge as part of his scoring of that round" - but you must see a KD is not up to the judges - its the referees decision isn't it - do we agree?

 

Yes that's the part you're actually not wrong on. You're wrong that a knockdown is scored as a points deduction, as I'm sure you're finding as you search for that one screenshot.

I ain't doing your googling for you mate, the correct method of scoring has been patiently explained to you. If you're actually interested in learning more (rather than just 'assuming' you already know) I'm sure you can work a search engine. IIRC Eric Sloan wrote some informative guides to scoring a while back that you should probably still be able to find.

 

you have been given several examples yet you still hold on to your OPINION which is totally incorrect.

to give u a simple example fighter a knocks down fighter b at this point you are looking at 10-8 for fighter a. fighter b returns the kd later in the round. we are not at 8-8, we are back at 10 points for whoever wins the round.

as you have been told numerous times, 10 point must means just that. the only point deductions that can change that are the result of fouls. which you see the referee clearly instruct the judges of the deductions.

 

i didnt know how they scored, i was just talkin in regards to one fighter dominating a round and getting knocked down.

10-9 it is.