10-10 and 10-8 scoring's should be used more liberally.

i'm in favor of 10-10 rounds but definitely not 10-8 rounds w/o a KD. that will make the scoring more confusing and much more subjective than it already is.

 

:good :good

 

Agree about 10-10 rounds but disagree about 10-8 rounds. 10-8 rounds should be reserved exclusively for incredibly one sided rounds. Otherwise, you risk giving the guy losing the round an unfair disadvantage for the rest of the fight.

But i wish more judges would give out 10-10 rounds if it's too close to call. I mean why not?

 

I should've read this before i posted. :good

 

I score lots of 10-10 rounds.

 

Agreed, I often have about two even rounds or so in most of my scores.

 

Me too. But because of the way scoring has been established, i sometimes wonder if i'm giving too many 10-10 rounds. But i just hate giving a round to one guy over another if it's so close. I mean it's unfair to the guy getting the short end of the round. Why not just go 10-10 and let the decisive rounds determine the fight? :good

 

Give me ONE example of a fight where every single round was that close.

 

With you on the 10-10s.

I have a feeling it would be easy to start abusing liberal 10-8s.

 

There should never be a 10-10 round.

It is impossible for two humans, over 3 minutes to fight to an exact perfect score; if there is anything difference at all, it could be the smallest difference in the history of differences, one fighter did better than the other, no matter how slightly.

The rules state the winner recieves 10, and the loser 9 or less, there is always always always a winner and a loser.

It is a cowards way out to call a tie. This is the whole point of judges, to make tough calls, if we only give obvious rounds to the winner, we wouldn't need judges, its obvoius.

As for 10-8 rounds, if you do this, then you need to also do it for rounds with knockdowns and make alot more 10-7 rounds with 1 kd, as it is vital to give that extra point of kds.

 

The problem you run into here, that you avoid with an even round, is you're giving the same credit for rounds "won" by miniscule to non-existant margins as you are to rounds that are clearly won.

An even round isn't cowardly or lazy. In fact, in a lot of cases it proves that you are paying very close attention to the subtleties of the round, and have decided that both men deserve equal credit.

I agree that in most cases, you can find something to differentiate an even from a 10-9 round. but in almost every competitive fight, there is going to be at least one round that features completely balanced action. It's too bad official judges have quit with this useful tool.

 

I just don't understand this line of thinking. I don't understand why you think that there has to be a winner and loser in each round no matter how impossible it might be the decipher a winner. I don't know where this line of thinking comes from. Why the need to say a fighter won or lost a round, no matter how close it might be is beyond me.

I would much rather reward both fighters for their efforts in such rounds and let the decisive rounds decide the fight. And no, i'm not saying score any somewhat close rounds 10-10. I'm talking about giving 10-10s in rounds that are simply way too close to call. And i realize that even with this line of thinking, one still has to make tough, subjective choices in somewhat close rounds with 10-9 scores. But i think the 10-10 mentality is good to fall back on in rounds where it's just too close to call. And they don't happen all the time.

 

i definitely agree with scoring rounds 10-10 more often. such could be the case on fights like b-hop vs calaghe. sometimes, they are just too close to call.