Scoring close rounds in close fights.

The answer everyone is overlooking is using more of the spectrum of the point system.

Why have 10 points if no one is EVER going to score the loser of a round less than 7? That’s a 3-point system.

A round with very little to choose should be 10-9.

Fairly decisive should be 10-8.

Decisive but didn’t really hurt the opponent, 10-7.

Then add in knockdowns and you can award the loser even fewer points.

THAT would settle it.

 

There are judges that will score rounds 10-6 in the event of multiple KD's.

Or do the half point system instead. At that point, very close rounds could be scored 10-9.5, decisive rounds 10-9 and what have you. They use that in Argentina these days, and have used variants of that in the past. Works reasonably well.

That said, I feel like sometimes it's a cop-out to score a really close round one way or the other, so there are times when it's absolutely appropriate to score an even round. There were points in the not too distant past where judges didn't have that self-imposed moratorium against 10-10 rounds, and the amount of really horrible decisions wasn't any greater than it was today.

 

The half point system is like Spinal Tap with the amp that goes up to 11.

Just use more of the scoring spectrum. No reason a fighter can’t win a round by 2 or 3 points if it’s more decisive than that opening feeling out round.

 

So, in theory, a fighter can be behind by 8 or 9 points if they suffer one really bad round. The idea eliminates or severely restricts the abilty of being able to come back at all, even if the victim of that harrowing rounds happen to win say, 9 or 10 of the rounds that follow.

Half point rounds at least give a better idea of what has occurred in the round. The people that tend to be averse to it tend to dislike it because...math.

 

Yes, a bad round would but a fighter in a hole. But a big round by the fighter who is behind gets him right back in it.