The Knockdown rule should be changed...

It depends.....

Because get a guy like Naz who was prone to a flash KD, may only ship a single punch in a round and get decked - and could land with 30 shots, yet lose the round 10-8.

 

Wasn't the Holyfield-Moorer I knockdown round 2 scored 10-10 or 9-9 by the judges or something? Because Moorer was dominating it then right near the end got caught with a one-two and had to take a knee.

 

That's actually a very good point. :good

 

Don't roll your eyes cretin. A KD rarely results in a 10-7 round. What disparity? Being penalized for the KD does not mean the round is losed for scoring or that the rest of the round isn't taken into account.

 

it does give 3 points if the person who was winning the round is ther person who suffers the KD in a close round that would have ended up 10-9 now ends up as 8-10 so a 3 point swing

 

If someone is careless enough to be put on their arse because they opened up during a winning round, i don't really object to a penalising 10-8 round. Part of being a boxer is knowing when to maximise risk and when to minimise it.

 

good idea. however, a knockdown may be the only objective factor scoring a round. If there is no Knockdown, the round is decided by 3 judges subjectively. so adding more subjectivity about the "score" of a Knockdown, means more confusion (and more people trying to kill each other in an internet forum for the sake of their views )

 

The best way to stop it I suppose it not to get knocked down.

 

i agree to an extent,but if i was changed the boxers wouldnt go for the kd they would box safe more often.that would be boring.
calling a 10-9 round to the less dominant boxer who dropped the dominant boxer may be fair,but if the dominant boxer drops the less dominant boxer i think it is fair to call a 10-8 round.
​

 

sometimes winning a round is subjective. a lot of fighter can look better than they really are (forexample, winky wright and Bhop), but a knockdown is a knockdown. but i've seen fights that were scored 10-9 after a knockdown is awarded to the general loser of the round

 

Sorry about the typo. Deeply ashamed. As for your problem with 10-8 rounds, judges don't have to award it that way..when there's no '10 point must' 9-9 rounds occur and when there isn't judges can award 10-9 after the KD..rare these things happen because though because knock downs against the flow of action are infrequent. Let me know if there's any more ways you need my guidance.

 

you make a good point but if a fighter A is barely winning a round 10-9 and his opponent, fighter B, turns the round around then fighter A losses the round by 9-10... which is a 2 point swing. a KD would only realistically account for 1 point reguardless.

are judges scoring less 9-9 rounds? maybe, but i've hardly ever seen, at the higher levels of boxing, a one fighter completely dominate his opponent and then get cought with a silly punch that drops him (no, calzaghe wasn't decisively winning the first round)... more often then not if you're knocked down you're either being dominated or it's either a close round in which you've managed to lose ground and your opponent was able to land some effective punches - which is how the fight is scored, rind generalship and effective punching.