10 point must system, problems with it, and suggested solutions

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Super Hans, Dec 17, 2013.


  1. LordSouness

    LordSouness Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,195
    691
    Feb 15, 2014
    I think a 10-8 round does the same thing. Introducing more 10-10 scoring and more 10-8 rounds would fix a lot of the issues.

    This means if someone dominates 4 rounds and the other shades 8 rounds you have a draw. I think that's fair, personally.

    Same as you I had the fight slightly for Peterson, but it wasn't a robbery under the scoring system - but it was a good example of where 10-8 scoring would have made a significant difference to the scoring. You're talking 2-4 less points for Garcia
     
  2. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super One™ banned

    48,579
    88
    Apr 18, 2013

    I think to non fans/ casuals starting from 0 and adding points on, rather than starting than starting from 10, makes it easier to understand.

    If a fight score is announced as 12-0 they would understand that fighter A has won all 12 rounds, whereas 120-108 most none fans would have no idea.
     
  3. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super One™ banned

    48,579
    88
    Apr 18, 2013

    But why start from 10?

    Why not make it easier to understand for casuals and none fans.

    So in your system rather than having a draw as 10-10, why not 0-0?
    If they just win 1-0, clear win 2-0, knockdown 3-0.
     
  4. shoe

    shoe Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,560
    563
    Dec 2, 2013
    everyone who's ever watched a pro fight knows about 10, and it's explained every card. no need to rock the boat too hard. it's all academic anyway. unlikely any changes will be made.
     
  5. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super One™ banned

    48,579
    88
    Apr 18, 2013
    Even on this forum you see people who don't really understand the 10 point must system so I don't think that necessarily true. When the Froch- Groves fight was on I was trying to explain to people who have watched the pro game before why that round was 10-9. It would make much more sense if it was 1-0.

    Also the scorecards would be easier for casuals to understand- why make it needlesly complexed. For example, saying Pacquiao beat Algieri 120-103, most none fans might think that means Pacquiao landed 120 shots and Algieri landed 103. Whereas saying Pacquiao won 18-0, (every round plus 6 knock downs) gives a true reflection of his dominance.
     
  6. Ricdog

    Ricdog Active Member Full Member

    665
    257
    Apr 10, 2015
    I sort of like your idea, especially in simplifying things. But it could also lead to weird results. Case in point in the rare fights were some rounds are so close, you could have many 0-0...which could also confuse people. You could be several rounds into a fight and still be at 0-0, which some fans may not fully understand as well.

    But honestly I don't think its really a matter of the 10 point system, rather simply how subjective boxing is to scoring. Lets say fighter "A" is winning the round rather easily and your thinking its gonna be 2-0. But then fighter "B" lands a huge punch that wobbles "A" badly. Who won the round and what score? Does "A" still win 2-0 or maybe 1-0....or does "B" win 0-1 or 0-2....or its a 0-0???

    Honestly I think boxing is simply too subjective to really have a clear system of judging. That being said yours interesting enough to the point where I wouldn't mind it being tested somewhere. Why don't you submit this idea somewhere, like send a letter to some low level boxing organization and see if it takes off from there.
     
  7. Nonito Smoak

    Nonito Smoak Ioka>Lomo, sorry my dudes Full Member

    53,088
    6,686
    Sep 8, 2010
    I did.

    So then score more one sided rounds 10-8 even without a knockdown.

    Nobody's stopping you.
     
  8. Nonito Smoak

    Nonito Smoak Ioka>Lomo, sorry my dudes Full Member

    53,088
    6,686
    Sep 8, 2010
    It defeats the entire purpose of boxing through history and if had been implemented from day one would have changed several major results through history and not rightfully so, in my opinion.

    The point of pro boxing scoring is to put the emphasis on consistent winning of rounds throughout in set time slots (three mins at a time). Not; "dominate one round and that equals two or three rounds." The strategy and stamina conserving becomes more important.
     
  9. ryuken87

    ryuken87 Active Member Full Member

    1,468
    877
    Mar 8, 2014
    I agree wholeheartedly with the OP, 10 point must is a bit silly and a bit redundant to start at 10, when is there ever a 10-3 or 10-4 round? It makes much more sense to start at 0 and I agree with 1-0 close, 2-0 dominant win, 3-0 knockdown etc.

    The other problem I have however is with the criteria of scoring. Rounds may be scored on "effective aggression" and "ring generalship" which are highly subjective and lead to ****py scoring. For me rounds should be scored on the number of punches landed clean, followed by the number of punches half-landed, and the effect those punches have on the opponent.

    Last problem I have is with close fights given as split decisions. I think SDs should count as draws and here is why:
    - Assume 50% of all judges in the world score a fight for fighter A and 50% for fighter B.
    - Assume all judges are unbiased and know how to score a fight (ha!).
    - Judge 1 scores for fighter A, judge 2 scores for fighter B, if judge 3 is picked at random from the population of judges, then it is completely random as to which fighter gets the nod (50:50 chance). In essence fighters' careers are decided on coin flips.

    Highly doubtful anything will change however. Boxing is very much a sport stuck in the dark ages.
     
  10. Badbot

    Badbot You can just do things. Full Member

    48,106
    36,902
    Apr 17, 2011
    my biggest beef is the 10-8 must if a fighter scores a KD. That can be a 3 point swing.
     
  11. Andyw

    Andyw Active Member Full Member

    851
    57
    Mar 8, 2008
    Agree one of the problems with the current system is that people (including judges) tend to make a KD an automatic 10-8.

    For me if Fighter A is dominating Fighter B but then suffers a flash knockdown, he shouldn't go from winning 10-9 to losing 10-8.

    I'm sure there have been cases where judges have only given a fighter scoring a KD a 10-9 (can't recall any at the moment) but its far too infrequent. Currently KD = turn off brain and ability to judge, automatically mark it 10-8.
     
  12. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super One™ banned

    48,579
    88
    Apr 18, 2013

    Well have you actually seen some of the rounds that are scored 10-8 without a knock down? You basically have to come close to knocking them out.

    An example would be that if boxing was seen as 1 36 minute round, Peterson kicked Garcia's ass on Sat. Seen as on a round by round basis, Garcia still had a claim to win it.

    And you say nobodies stopping you, but if for example a judge awarded Peterson a 10-8 round, I'm sure they'd be stopped from judging a major fight for the foreseeable future so what judge has the bottle?

    What judge do you
     
  13. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super One™ banned

    48,579
    88
    Apr 18, 2013

    You do know various rules of boxing have changed over time right? Hell they even have different rules in different states. Cintron-Williams would've been a TD in any other state for example
     
  14. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super One™ banned

    48,579
    88
    Apr 18, 2013
    Any changes they seem to be looking at making seem to make things more complex, such as the half-point system they was experimenting with mentioned in the OP
     
  15. Super Hans

    Super Hans The Super One™ banned

    48,579
    88
    Apr 18, 2013
    I think I recall in the Cotto-Pacquiao fight the 2nd round where Pac scored a KD was marked as 10-9 by a least on of the judges.