Why don't we see more rounds scored even?

I know, bad example.

 

scoring even rounds is so difficult, because ring generalship, power punching, and whatever criteria you want to go into.

 

Nah, thats my brother from another mother, father and state, Suge Knight. We got the same look but not by choice on my part.

 

Don't get me wrong. I definitely do. I just think it needs to be a real shelling where the opponent is not throwing back much if at all and I wouldn't want to see it too liberally applied.

 

Maybe on our RBR you see a few 10/10 but lately the official judges struggle to correctly ID a 10/9 round for the right guy.

 

didnt that man get his glass jaw smashed in the streets?

 

It usually leads to more draws. More 10-8 rounds need to be scored when there isn't a knockdown though if there is complete domination.

 

Remember the scoring used in the 1992 Barcelona Olympics? I believe it was 3 judges must all press a button within a second of each other to score a landed punch. If I recall correctly, jabs didn't seem to matter at all with the judges.

 

Agreed. Let's get a Trump to do something about it! And fix the alphabet titles and corrupt judges!

I think I'll write him a letter......

 

I thought being beat from pillar to post is what being floored means.

 

Although I agree, but a domination round by a particular fighter is still Very subjective. I do not think about this beforehand, but let's say tszyu Judah round 1. Most people will agree it was a Judah round, but is it a 2 point round?

 

Very valid argument, but the subjective aspect is why we have 3 judges. Assuming there is no group think or corruption it would all balance out. For me, I don't give out a 10-8 round unless one guy is getting battered, but at the same time I'd be fine if someone had more lenient standards.

 

My take on it is that no member of the jury is truly impartial, and the trend of hardly giving 10-10 rounds anymore just provokes them to score all of them for the one they favor/bigger name/home fighter.

The American idea of "there has to be a winner", even if neither is actually better as the other is a strange idea which only causes corruption. Check history in boxing and if it would be impartial then it should be around 50/50 in close "could go either way" and "close but..." fights with name/home/connected fighters... Everyone knows even before checking that it's closer to 95/5 in their favor, which at least would be corrected to some degree when even rounds would be scored even (10-10).

It also has to do with the very flawed 10 points must system, that makes it possible for the clearly lesser fighter in the ring to still win or draw, certainly if he's a crowd/judges' favorite.
Nobody can tell me Alexander beat Matthysse for instance, but the 10 point must system and judges' favoritism allowed that sh_t to happen. With the even rounds in that fight scored even that would hardly be possible.

 

Fully agree, if it's too close to call they should score the round even imo. I did this quite a bit in my scoring of Kovelev/Ward.