If the referee stops the fight due to a fighter taking too much punishment or being defenceless- I understand why it’s a TKO. But when a boxer is knocked out cold flat out, it’s a KO. It doesn’t matter to me if the referee doesn’t give the count and stops it, that’s a KO and it should be listed as a KO
Who are u betting with? If i pick a round then it makes no difference if its a KO, ref stops fight or the towel comes in
This was the Povetkin fight. I didn't pick a round. I had Povetkin to best Whyte by KO with Skybet. And they didn't payout as they said TKO isn't KO. When it was clear for all the see he was KO'd but the ref didn't count so it was classed as a TKO.
It’s a stupid rule that should be changed. If a fighter is knocked out cold and the ref waves the fight off because they deem giving a count to be moot than it should always go down as a KO.
In USA there were tons of fights that are listed as KOs while there was no count: - Derrick Jefferson vs Maurice Harris - Kirk Johnson vs Oleg Maskaev - Samuel Peter vs Jeremy Williams - Calvin Brock vs Zuri Lawrence - Oscar Valdez vs Miguel Berchelt - Manny Pacquiao vs Ricky Hatton - Wilder vs Szpilka - Canelo vs Khan - Canelo vs Kirkland - Canelo vs Kovalev Hell, even in UK there was a fight recently in which referee didn't start the count, yet it is listed as KO: This content is protected
There were no 10 counts in Canelo's brutal KO wins over Khan, Kirkland and Kovalev. Yet, they are listed as KOs (and rightfully so). So what is the difference between Martinez vs Galahad KO and all these Canelo knockouts? There is no difference at all - there was no count in either of those fights, so clean, cold knockout should be listed as KO win