Scoring even rounds. I love it.

In controversial fights I employ the 10/10 to try to get to the truth. In robberies I give the 10/10 rounds to the fighter who ended up winning, the theory being if the fighter who was robbed still sweeps up the lion's share of rounds after having the close ones taken away on principal then it was definately a robbery and not just a close loss.

 

No, I think it's on a round by round basis. I think a lot of people are thrown by the term "ten point must". It doesn't mean you have to give the winner of a round ten points no matter what - it means he needs to start out with ten points. If he commits a flagrant foul (or ignored repeated warnings of a minor one) or is knocked down, that is a negative mark against him - a point is deducted. Let's say Red Robot knocks Blue Robot down at the end of a round Blue Robot dominated - neither Robot should get ten points. Red Robot gets only nine because he lost. Blue Robot is deducted one point because he got knocked down. You wouldn't give them each ten, that's ludicrous. You don't reward things like losing the round or getting knocked down, which is what you'd be doing by giving each Robot ten points instead of nine.

 

I can settle for 10-10, just as long as the points are even, at least the principles are being upheld. I'd still rather it be 9-9 though, but not a major problem.

 

Thanks for the info, that explains a lot of what i was asking in my earlier post.

 

i always score even rounds if i dont feel someone won that round. with froch v dirrel i had it 117-114 to froch...that is 6 rounds for froch, 3 rounds for dirrel and 3 even (although one was cos of the deduction)

 

it's a 10 point must system, so no.

Fighter A is dominating the round, holding the centre of the ring and outlanding the other man, but suffers a flash knock down right at the end of a round. Fighter B wins the round for scoring the KD, but is awarded a 10-9 round.

If Fighter B had been clinching constantly, he might have been docked a point - so 9-9 then.

If both fighters scored a KD, you might score it 10-9 for guy that did the more effective work overall in the three minutes, but give the other guy credit for scoring a KD.

The fighter scoring a knock down will always win the round, but the margin may be reduced because he may have been losing the round clearly until that point.

 

I agree that would make more sense on KD's and is also the way I've interpreted the rules before - that you lose a point for getting knocked down so you can't get 10 points and the same if you lose the round. I was just thinking if someone took 10 point must as meaning someone must get 10 then 10-10 would be the only way to score it even.

I'm sure points deducted by the ref are treated differently though and not deducted till the end of the fight but I don't have any links to back that up, so unless you do we'll just have to agree to disagree for the time being on it.

Either that or get into the most boring and pointless argument in the history of ESB over it.

 

I don't agree with that at all. If that is how it is then that's how it is but as a fan/purist i'm not fond of it. By the way on your point about the definition of 10 point must, IntentionalButt just disagreed and we all like his version better!

 

Red Robot wins the round because he scored a knock down, but the other fighter is given credit for dominating the round, so 10-9 is fair.

 

What, who gets ten points - the guy who got knocked down but dominated? No way!

 

http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Ten-point_must_system

Ten point "MUST" - as in the winner of the round - must score ten points UNLESS they commit a foul.

I can argue a 10-9 where the guy who was knocked down was beating the other guy from pillar to post. 9-9 seems unfair for the guy who landed the best shot of the round and scored a KD.

he lost the round by getting knocked down - simple as that.

 

I always assumed it was that the winner must score ten points UNLESS they commit a foul OR suffer a knockdown. :think

 

If you get knocked down, you lose the round. Unless you knock the other guy down. Then it goes back to being either a 10-10, which is unfair in my opinion, or you score 10-9 for the guy who dominated the round outside of the KDs. Basically, they cancel each other out.

 

scoring roudns even is a cop out

 

Thanks for the link, i read it but it didn't actually give an insight into the scenario we put forth, a man wins the round in clearly but then gets a flash kd.

Not saying you're wrong though, i am saying that if you are right then i don't like it.