https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/Jake_LaMotta_vs._Laurent_Dauthuille_(2nd_meeting) Judges' scores at the time of the knockout: 72-68, 74-66, 71-69 (all for Dauthuille) Could someone explain to me how this system works?
It looks like the 5 point system is employed but these judges were utilizing a lot of even rounds. Such as the 72-68 is something like 6-2-6 for Dauthille.
This was a system where there were 10 points in total for each round, to be divided between the two fighters. So 5-5 for an even round, or 6-4, 7-3, 8-2 etc depending how clearly the round was won. There was a theory that it cut down on errors because if you've added up your card correctly then the totals for the two fighters should come to 150 at the end (or 140 in this case, with 14 completed rounds). In rounds, the scores for this fight were 8-6, 7-3-4 and 7-6-1.
Although the score-by-rounds cards submitted by Handler (8-6) and judges Joe Lenahan (6-4-4) and Jack Aspery (7-6-1), all for Dauthuille, indicated the action had been reasonably close, BoxRec.com lists wide points advantages of 74-66, 72-68 and 71-69 for the Frenchman, and the account of the fight in The Ring – which would later name it Fight of the Year – read that “all Dauthuille required when the bell sounded for the final round was to play safe, and had he boxed he would have come through triumphantly.” Thank for the explanation !
That's the thing about this system. Because a round which we would score 10-9 is scored 6-4 - a gap of 2 points instead of 1 - it looks to our eyes like whoever was in the lead was twice as far ahead as he actually was. LaMotta was behind but not hopelessly behind. If in the final round he had floored Dauthuille but failed to finish him, it would likely have bagged him a 7-3 round, which would have been enough to salvage a draw and keep the title.
You're right. It was the divided 10 point system. I should have looked closer at the scores and the fact that only 14 rounds were scored and the highest it could have topped out at would have been a score of 70 on a 5 point system. The divided 10 point system was used throughout the Midwest (Illinois, Missouri, Michigan) at the time. Good catch.
10, 9 doesn't mean it was a close round, it could have well been a blow out round too, 10 to the winner and 9 to the loser... can be relatively even or a whitewash, No?
Thistle, that's where the judge has to be educated on today's 10 point must system (if todays system is what you're referring to). The judge has the ability to exercise that 10 point system to make a round 10-8 if there was a bit of a battering involved. I've scored many rounds 10-8 without a knockdown because there was a bit of a battering. Again, it's up to the commission to have their judges up on proper scoring. Because you should never have a whitewash a 10-9.
I agree, and I believe some judges do do that for a dominant round, likewise more than 'one' knockdown only scores 10-7, I believe. anyway, yeah, it should be set in stone so that it is perfectly clear to all concerned, including fans. mind you, you'd still get Home decisions, corruption and payoffs... shameful sport/Business that it is.
Even rounds were common, it should still be that way IMO, it´s much much better than scoring 10-9 undeservedly so to a guy just because you can´t score even rounds anymore...
I investigated and found these scores in two French newspapers: https://www.noelshack.com/2024-44-5-1730465760-dauthuillepoints.png 72-68 becomes 73-67 and even with a 7-3 LaMotta at R15, the Raging Bull would have lost.
Well, according to the Associated Press, and also to the Boxrec article you originally posted, the scores after 14 rounds were 72-68, 74-66 and 71-69. That means a 7-3 15th round for LaMotta would give final scores of 75-75, 77-73 and 74-76. Depends who you choose to believe, I guess. https://ibb.co/Wnsgpfn
