Over the years there has been alot of debate about how you score a round that has a KD in it. How costly was the scoring of it in the first Pacman vs Marquez bout for instance - it does seem to be a grey area.
Just wondering if any of you guys have thought of a theory that could be put forward to help clarify this matter.
Should it be automatic deduction at the end of the round of two points to the guy who has been floored - so there for should the round be judged level barring the KD, the round it would be 10-8, should the guy floored win the round it would be 9-8 (infavour of the guy who score the knockdown)... should the guy floored be losing the round anyway it would be scored 10-7.
What if a second/third KD is scored in the round - a futher point for each KD?
That would then mean Pacquiao would have won the opening round 10-5 - meaning an opponent would have a mountain of work to do win a 6 rounder.
I don't know, I have just been thinking of it really reading some of the threads on bad/good stoppages. This system doesn't seem perfect, but I do think a clearer system should be in use - any suggestions?
And what about dominating rounds that don't have a KD in them?
The scoring of a knock down.
-
rubberneck
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 379
- Joined: 19 Oct 2003, 08:28
I don't know whether this system is in use, but how about if the points deductions for KDs are taken away at the end of the fight.
That way if a fighter is winning a round clearly but suffers a flash KD toward the end of the round the he wins the round 10-9, but the 1 point deduction is applied at the end of the fight, when the scores are being totalled. Would this make scoring easier for the judges???? Perhaps.
That way if a fighter is winning a round clearly but suffers a flash KD toward the end of the round the he wins the round 10-9, but the 1 point deduction is applied at the end of the fight, when the scores are being totalled. Would this make scoring easier for the judges???? Perhaps.