OK, I seem to be THE Floyd Patterson nut-hugger on board here but I wanted to get folks opinions on the traditional scoring format on a round. What we currently have (please correct me, I've basically blown off boxing for the last 20 years save the occasional marque matchup) Scoring by rounds: pretty straightforward win-lose-draw tho a knockdown will Always give you the round. 10 point must-system: an even round? 10-10, a winner gets a 10-9, a knockdown gives you a 10-8, in rare cases a total kick ass (non-knockdown) round gives you a 10-8, Two knockdowns a 10-7. California: I'm not sure they even score this way anymore, Even round 0-0, Winner of a round, 1-0, Knockdown in a round, 2-0, Two knockdowns in a round 3-0... My question is, does a knockdown simply give you the round without question? I've seen Floyd being off-balance being hit with a less than a big shot and going down with a sheepish, embarrassed, smile on his face (Radamacher/Quarry 2 come to mind). If you are whomping someone's tail for 2:45 and get nailed with an off -balance shot, should you be down 10-8 without question? Maybe its the only way to score objectively, I don't know. I'm not here to defend Patterson's passivity (it cost him both Quarry fights which he should have come out 2-0 not to mention the Ellis scrap-Floyd clearly won rounds 4-6-13-14, and Valen scored the other 11 Ellis 9-2???) IMHO one's effort over the entire 3:00 counts, if you're on top of someone and landing consistently for the majority of the round, why does an off-balance KD give the other guy a 10-8 automatically? Just interested in what you guys (many of you much more knowledgeable then myself) think?
