Should I restate the question, if a fight happens and during the fight someone gets knocked down , how much influence does this weigh on the scorecards if the fight is finished by both. Have y'all seen fights where maybe a knockdown late in the fight might've stuck in a judges mind even though he won and out boxed his opponent the majority of the other rounds .
Bernard Hopkin's scoring a knockdown against Joe Calzaghe certainly swayed the opinion of a lot of people that he won. Even though Joe out threw and out landed him by about double.
Bradley vs Provodnikov was a clear case. Bradley was winning round. Provodnikov was winning some but not enough to clearly have won the fight. There were times when he hurt Bradley bad but was not able to capitolize on it. Bradley regained himself and got back in control. Then Provodnikov drops him at the end of the fight. To the casual viewer it would seem like Provodnikov was the winner. He was never hurt but he hurt Bradley, he was dropped him in the last round, and that was like a signature. But, for me I knew that the last round was not enough. I knew that if they did not score those round that Prov had him really hurt as 10-8 then even with the knock down, he loses. He should have when to that body and finished him.
People always bring up the knockdown and near-stoppage in the 12th round of De La Hoya-Quartey. Having a great finish doesn't mean you won more rounds throughout the fight. De La Hoya got lucky, he spent much of the fight doing even less than Quartey. The 6th round and the last round also sticks in the memory of people and this gets called a great fight. In actuality, most of the fight lacked action and it wasn't even some great chess match. Much of it was simply two guys posing and doing nothing.
Aaron Pryor knocking Gary Hinton down late in the fight was enough to erase the comprehensive schooling Hinton gave him over fifteen rounds.
That is a good question and the reason behind scorecards being stand alone per round. It would depend on the scoring system used for example the 10 point must system. Each round is supposed to be scored independently and the scores added at the end. Generally what happens is both fighters beguin with 10 pts each rd the winner of the rd gets 10 the loser gets 9. If a fighter is dropped he is deducted 2 points giving him an 8 if the fighter knocked down wins the round he can cause the one scoring the KD to only get 9 pts. becoming a 9-8 round. Fighter dropped twice or thoroughly dominated he may get a 7 pt round. Both fighters dropped they should both drop to 8 pts and the loser would lose another point to a 7. Generally this is what you see, if the judges score the fight like they should a knockdown should only count for that round. This is generally what you see in the U.S. and most countries follow as far as professional. Can it influence the overall fight, yes of course it can create perception in a judge that a fighter is not in control of the fight.
pitter patter slaps, even if you throw 1000 per round, do not win you rounds on a competent judges' scorecards. Just like Oscar DLH in his fight against Floyd and when he got gifted vs Pernell Whitaker.
I'm not sure about that one Kolcade, since a judge writes down his tab for each round when its ended a late fight knockdown wouldn't change those tabulations if they had the other fighter in front. A bout this brings to mind is Norton's last fight and it was against Scotty LeDoux in Minneapolis. Norton won 6 of the first 7 rounds but then had nothing left and Scott mopped up for the last three and finished the 10th knocking Kenny down twice which was enough for the draw (Scott's corner called him off early thinking the bell had rung or Norton would have been out from the next LeDoux overhand right). The last round didn't influence the judges against each prior rounds scores but the 20-17 tab stood by itself to even the bout out.