What is the argument for and against scoring 10-10 rounds?

It should be used a lot more.A lot of rounds are pretty even.

 

Chris Eubank Sr was the master of making it appear he won rounds that he really didn’t lol, just by appearing unfazed by a punch landed and appearing in control by posing calmly or something. Or a flashy flurry towards the end.

That’s why he had so many disputed decisions. A lot of new judges from the states or puerto rico weren’t aware of his tricks yet. They all caught up and caught on in the end by the time of the Collins fights.

 

>In the meantime, he made a fortune! (For that time)

 

If a round is so close and you're not sure who won it,,,it was even

 

I fell into the habit of trying not score rounds even (or a maximum of one) around 20+ years ago and at the end of fights felt my scorecards weren't quite right now a fair few times. I think more 10-10s should be scored if a judge truly feels he can’t separate the fighters, rather than the idea of “we have to award a round to someone” (usually the champ or big name star). When I was scoring one or two even rounds more regularly (probably pre-2000) it always seemed a more accurate reflection of the how I felt the fight had gone- or maybe i'm talking utter shyte, I can't always tell these days.

I remember one of the JMM-Pac fights (the 2nd I think) and going into the final round I had it even- when I felt that JMM was ahead and was surprised at my card, as well as the fact that even a close round for Pac would see him the winner. I scored the last for JMM but maybe the situation made me subconsciously biased as it seemed right (I'm not quite sure, but i think JMM deserved the 12th from memory).

So yeah, I think more even rounds should be scored for a better reflection and a bit less controversy, as long as it doesn’t morph into Judge Rolf Neuhold’s card for the Carmello Bossi - Jose Hernandez light-middleweight fight in 1971, which ended 150-150.