If a Boxer is Knocked Down 3 Times in 1 Round, How would you score it?

10-6 or 10-7?

For example in the Pacquiao vs Marquez 1 Fight, The 2 judges scored Round 1, 10-6 to Pacquiao and 1 judge scored it 10-7 to Pacquiao.
How would most judges score a round if a fighter has been knocked down 3 times in 1 round?

 

I'm confused, others here say that judges don't score it 10-6 anymore if a fighter has been knocked down 3 times in 1 round because that means it would make it harder for the other boxer to catch up on points.

:huh

 

I'd score it 10-6, but I've read somewhere that you're allowed to score it 10-7 if you feel it's gonna' put the fighter in too deep of a hole to crawl back out of. Not sure if that's permissable?

 

Just looks more neat.

 

This comes up like once or twice a year...weren't judges traditionally taught to score rounds no less than 10-7 much like not having even rounds...sort of an unspoken rules of baseball kind of thing for boxing...it depends on the era (or whatever era/region the judge is from)

 

ah i see, thanks.

 

Yes, I have also heard that judges rarely go lower than 10-7.

 

I'm no historian, I'm just recalling what I remember seeing some smart posters come to consensus on last time the damn JMM-Pac I scorecards came up.

 

I would probably score it 10-6

But as Harald Leaderman has said it's not compulsory and is at the judges disrection, as putting a fighter 10-6 (four rounds down) puts them too far out of the fight

Mayweather knocked Corrales 3 times in round 7, and as far as I know all? (definitely one) judge scored it 10-7 to Mayweather, not 10-6.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=PEvMq427NyE#t=772s <--Link goes to exact time

Harold: By The way Jim, the 3 knockdown round, I went 10-7, most judges won't go lower as they feel it puts the fighter too far out of the fight

(He then proceeds to ***** about the 10-6 round in Pac-Marquez) :-(

 

No it doesn't, it's a bit annoying actually

And you better not think you're special or cool for doing it

 

Here is Harald saying the opposite in this vid :-( (link directs to exact time)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CAxSiNz3aPA#t=835s

I suppose when it suits HBO's interests he'll say anything

 

Also historically, since the 3 knockdown rule became less common, Judges have not gone below 10-7, in the same way they do not score even rounds.

 

The way I see it you have to reward deductions for a KD, knockdowns are part of a fight, scoring a fight involves the overall performance or grade of a fighter. On marquez it was due to lack of balance, as we seldom see he gets knockdown in his career for several times making his fights exciting. Now I could say that it is a negative attribute as a fighter as he lacks balance/ability to withstand force from a punch.

I think its just right to score that round 10-6 and award the knockdown as a point deduction as the rule goes, people should look at it positively and say he needs to better himself next time around and marquez did just that.

Although to be honest I feel that automatically scoring a round a 10-8 base on a fighter knocking down another just once is abit unfair, fighter A could be winning the round most of the time but B gets to land one shot when A gets comfortable for just a split second then B automatically gets a 10 and A an 8 just for that, I think the initial KD should just be -1 instead of -2 and -1 for every other knockdowns.