The 10 point must system

Logic has nothing to do with evidence, logic is a calculated asumption based on reasoning of probable outcomes.

 

@Flamazide how are you not experiencing any cognitive dissonance here?

"IB, you're wrong. All the pro judges who score 10-9 when there's a double knockdown EVERY TIME IT HAPPENS in a pro fight? They're wrong.

But @the factor, whom I've decided to imbue with some kind of authority for some reason, and call him the 'closest things on here to a boxing historian' ( ... never mind all the actual historians and writers multiple award winning books on boxing who are much greater presences in the Classic forum than your little man-crush whatsisface) - oh yeah, he definitely has it all figured out with his willful ignorance of why knockdowns are NOT the same as fouls and how the former only result in lost points a majority of times while the latter do ALWAYS."

Suuuure.

Oh and Teddy Atlas, great. And some hack writer. The four of you against the world. Yep. All pro judges, ever - they're just flat-out "wrong". Mm-kay.

 

No one said "All pro judges ever"
They don't do this "every time" it happens in a pro fight

You do realize there is actually a procedure you're taught for scoring right?
Look, scoring for boxing is not "I decide to take a point" it is "a point has been taken" when it comes to deductions. There is no decision. Judges don't have agency for that. That is why it is so important when referees deem things as slips or knockdowns. Because the REFEREE is the authority for that. Not the judge. What the judge actually does is interpret the round based on the scoring criteria. The scoring criteria is not "I decide if this knockdown is valid". A point is taken for a knockdown. If it were up the judge to decide if a knockdown was a knockdown or not you would see more subjectivity in knockdowns. The fact that you don't proves that it isn't up the judge to determine that. There is nothing to determine. You lose a point. You can't gain points. The INSTANT you get knocked down you lose a point but it isn't calculated until the round ends. You can't GAIN point though. There is nothing in boxing that has ever stated that you gain a point. You can not find that ANYWHERE in the sport.

Logic > appeal to authority. People are flawed. A system can be fundamentally flawed but that isn't what we're arguing. We're arguing the system. The system is clear. You can not gain points. Points are deducted from knockdowns. Judges have to go by what the ref deems is a knockdown. If a point is not deducted from knockdowns then why do you take a point from knockdowns? Why is it that every knockdown results in another point lost? Why are all knockdowns equal in terms of scoring? Why can't judges decide that a knockdown was a slip instead of a knockdown? That is because it isn't up to them.

 

You have zero idea what you're talking about. Nobody is saying you just arbitrarily decide when a knockdown is or isn't going to result in someone receiving a number of points below ten. It absolutely isn't arbitrary. There is a procedure in place for situations where both fighters get knocked down, and in those situations the procedure is to still give at least one combatant ten points. I've literally been explaining the procedure to you this entire time. I know more about boxing in general and in particular the scoring of it (hell, I've forgotten more) than you and @the factor know, combined. We aren't just all sitting around spitballing here, guessing are what it "ought" to be with each of us applying their own subjective take on what's "logical". I know the rules, and I'm telling you what they are. Yet from the beginning you have been committing the appeal to authority fallacy because you somehow believe @the factor (seriously who the hell is this guy? Before this exact thread I've never taken note of a single post of his, and the guy's been around for like 5 years? Talk about not making an impact..) to be some kind of infallible authority. Which...I'm not saying I am that, but I'm closer than either of you, on this particular subject.

 

That was from a foul though. It isn't what we're talking about. The issue is that they think there is a distinction in the points for some reason but no one can explain why.

 

Because there just is. Because that is how the rules of scoring a boxing match under the extant 10 point must system are set up. I know this for a FACT. This isn't my opinion.

9-9 can ONLY happen with a deduction for a foul. Knockdowns are not interchangeable with fouls. They are treated differently. Fouls and fouls alone can supersede the prime scoring directive of "ten point must". Knockdowns however cannot. This is true no matter how badly you may wish it not to be. And nobody gives a **** whether it makes sense to you. It just is that way.

 

Seriously who the hell is @the factor that you are willing to place your implicit trust in his (uninformed, stupid, and speculative based on a lack of core understanding of the rules) opinion above my thorough and repeated explanations of what I know the actual rules to be?

You have bet on the wrong horse, @Flamazide ...you don't seem to get bow badly you are humiliating yourself here and doing permanent damage to your credibility...and yet with zero self-awareness you keep doubling and tripling and quadrupling and quintupling (and onwards) down..

Serious question, are you on the autism spectrum? Asperger's maybe?

 

Show us WHY this is true like I have done. Also basically everything in this post is either wrong or irrelevant.

I'm not saying thefactor is right because he's thefactor. That is stupid. I said he is usually right about this. Him being right or wrong though has absolutely no bearing on anything I have ever said. I don't care what he thinks just like he doesn't care what I think. Rules are rules and truth is truth regardless of who it comes from. YOU are the one that keeps trying to appeal to authority. Even now in this post. You also STILL disregard points 1-4. You just say "This is wrong" "This is different" and you don't say why you think it is different. You have NEVER explained why you think a different set of rules apply to point deductions for fouls than they do for knockdowns. There is nothing in any set of rules that say this. Anywhere. Because it doesn't exist.

 

...What trust did I place in him in regards to this topic? I just said he's right. I'm not saying he's right because he knows a lot about the subject. I'm saying he's right because that is how you are supposed to apply the system. Both of us also EXPLAINED THIS which is something that you failed to do. You just ignore these points.

Also, imagine thinking credibility on a forum matters. Imagine thinking that people care about things like that. Imagine thinking that having an impact on a forum means anything at all.

 

I actually don’t care anymore, you lost me with your discription of logic.

 

Sorry yo. I think this can actually be better understood with math. Everything in the round can be represented through math. You can't skip/ignore steps

Start with 10 (10 point must)
knockdown. -1 (-1 for each knockdown occuring in the round)
Losing the round -1 OR -2 if it complete domination
Fouls -1

So both fighters knock each other down and at the same time went even in the round. That means it looks like this:

10 - 1 (or 10 + -1 if you want to be fancy) this =9

Now if it is 10 that means you did this:

10 - 1 +1 OR you ignored the -1 entirely.

You can't do that though because it means you scored wrong since you DIDN'T score something or you ADDED a point but there is no way to add a point. It is academic since the difference between 9-9 and 10-10 is nonexistent (this is what "Cancels each other out" actually means) but you still have to score everything in the fight. It has no PRACTICAL difference so it doesn't matter but strictly in terms of procedure it matters. There is no other way to represent 10-10. That's why it CAN'T be 10-10. The only logical way is 9-9.

This is also why it would be REALLY weird to do 10-10 in that context. You'd have to ignore things for no reason which you can't do. You deciding to ignore something would be the judge arbitrarily deciding to ignore it because there is no logical reason TO ignore it. The knockdowns happened.

Now, if you started at 9 and you GAINED a point for WINNING a round there wouldn't be a problem. But that isn't how it works.

 

Seriously my dude go and provide some real world examples of what you're claiming to be correct - examples should be plentiful - or STFU.

Noone wants to read the 'architect from the matrix'-esque level of drivel you are spouting on this.

 

It is BASIC math lmao. How the **** is 10-1 difficult to understand? WHY THE **** WOULD THERE BE PLENTIFUL EXAMPLES OF SOMETHING RARE?! Better yet, how the hell would I know random scorecards of a 9-9 score off the top of my head? We are now ignoring math. MATH. Dude this is hilarious. I actually see now why you guys are confused hahahaha,

 

You're a certified moron and this thread will essentially serve as the gravestone of your credibility on here as a poster.

It's all logic and 'BASIC MATH' and yet you can't provide any examples from any of the thousands of fights that have happened. GTFOH.