Lets take the recent Pac vs Marg fight as everyone saw it. If that match had been scheduled for 15 rounds, someone (probably the ref since his trainer was an idiot) would have stopped the fight before the 9th or 10th and saved him the 2 round beating. Knowing he wouldn't win and wasn't even close to the finish line yet, there would be no hestitation to stop it. Since it was only a 12 round fight, the ref (along with others) felt like they should let Marg be a warrior and allow him to make it to the end so he can tell people, "I went the distance with The Pac Man" Just an opinion. Not saying it was right. But that might b one case where it would have been safer to have 15 round fights.
they should make it 13 to help eliminate draws on the safety issue, I have no idea how big a difference it has made
There's nothing wrong with a draw... I actually think it's a lot more fair than for example a 126-123 / 124-125 / 124-125 score, where there's always the feeling that the loser could have been the winner if there was one other judge. In cases like that the draw is the best possible score.
Yeah but there's always a flat feeling in my stomach when fighters go through gruelling training camps and have a life or death struggle with each other just to get a 0-0-1 on their record
No they wont , judges can score even if they wish they can score 2 point rounds if they wish with or without knockdowns, refs take points that get removed at the end, it certainly wont eliminate draws but draws are rare anyway so thsi is a non issue