Why is the Boxer winning a round penalised effectively 3 points if he is knocked down? Let's take the Elomar/Kickett fight for example and assume that Kickett recovered to continue on. Kickett was all over Elomar and the round would have been 10-9 Kickett Elomar knocks Kickett down and the most likely scoring would be 10-8 Elomar.... a 3 point reversal.... But if Kickett who is easily winning the round....knocks down Elomar.... The knockdown is only worth 1 point. It seem wrong to me that the Boxer winning the round gets penalised for being good....Your thoughts:think
You have it all wrong mate, If Fighter A is winning the round easily but gets Knocked down by boxer B the round should be 9-9 ,but because we have a ten point must system someone has to get 10 points so it in affect becomes 10-10.
Fine in theory..... But how many times have you seen Judges rule that way.... I can only think of a few times tops... Another example..... Most pundits had Calzaghe winning the first round against RJJ... But Jones knocks him down..... Calzaghe probably still landed the most punches... but the round went to Jones 10-8...
Oztriker - I agree with you but judges seem to be set in their ways.For example in America judges very rarely score an even rd. The 1st rd of Calzaghe-Jones would have been scored 10-8 by the judges but take away the knockdown and Calzaghe won 2min 50 sec of that 1st rd.
So.... You understand what I'm getting at..... The round in reality should have been scored 10-10.... But Calzaghe had to win 2 rounds just to get the scoring back to where it should have been in the first place...:good
Were on the same page. Another factor can be when a fighter nicks a close rd it is scord 10-9. If a fighter is quite dominant in a rd it is still scored 10-9.This really isn't fair also.I know you can score a very dominant rd with no knockdown 10-8 but in reality the judges don't do this very often.
IMO a boxer is awarded 2 points for the knockdown, then thereafter. So close round one boxer gets the kd gets the round 10-8. Boxer A is winning round and gets clipped he gets up and loses round 9-10, since he would have won the round that how it should be to me imo. Not an 8-10 if they would have lost te round only a 9-10 since they scored the kd. Even in Brock McCline, brocxk rallies back and wins the round but loses it 9-10 since he was dropped
It pisses me off that really important fights are decided by Judges that won't use discretion......Boxer gets knocked down... he loses round 10-8...FFS!atsch
YEAH.... That one has pissed me off for years..... A boxer can totally dominate an opponent and gets the same score as his opponent does if he narrowly wins the round...:twisted:
Same, you see a guy clearly on a 10-9 round to lose is 8-10, when it should be only 9-10. But o well.
Really like this thread and brings up some very interesting points. In Australia, you get one point for a knockdown. So in effect the Elomar-Kickett fight is a beautiful example to use: In Australia - If Kickett gets up judges using the rules would have scored the fight 10-10: A round dominated by Kickett which would have won him the round 10-9 but Elomar gets one point for a knockdown Overseas/WT fight: - Elomar wins 10-8! Therefore Ahmed gets 3 points for one punch!
Im going against the grain here....but i feel a knockdown in the Kickett fight for example if he had gotten up deserves a 10-8 for Elomar. Thats why its the pros not the amateurs.
It depends on the knockdown for me aswell. Willie was badly hurt, if it had just been a soft flash knockdown I probably would have scored it a draw round.
I play by my own rules Mr Austin. Id be interested to know if your fancy footwear is legal under ANBF rules..Surely it would be a distraction to the judges ringside.