Quillen Robbed?

[koolkc107]

Might work. But a pretty close round with a KD is still usually scored 10-8.

But, my main point in the OP is to talk about the second KD in round one that was erroneously thought to have occurred after the bell.

The punch was before or with the bell and should have been counted.

You're on your own.

Wouldn't be the first time that's happened with me ultimately being proven right.

But right or wrong, nice to get folks views of what happened.

[jamesmcdonnell]

I disagree. I've watched it several times and if I pause the video when the bell first sounds Quillin is throwing a jab and has yet to land the right hand and left hook that come next.

You are wrong about scoring and have given no evidence that the round can only be scored 10-9 if the dropped fighter was dominant. Lee rocked Quillin earlier in the round anyway and I thought he clearly got the better of the action apart from going down.

Actually, under the 10 point must system the round MUST be scored 10-8 because the Ref clearly ruled it a KD.

But my point, and the point of this thread is not about round 3 but round one.

The punch landed right before the bell rang.

I'm afraid you don't know what you're on about.

The 10 point must system, means that one fighter MUST score a 10 before deductions are taken away for infringements.

It is quite clear in all rules, that a judge can score a round 10-8 for a knockdown, but that they don't have to do so, if they believe the knockdown was against the run of play so to speak. Unfortunately, not many judges these days do so, usually, they just credit the fighter who scored a knockdown with a 10-8 irrespective of what else transpired in the round.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Anyone who thinks Quillin was robbed needs to go book themselves in for a full frontal labotomy because you are seriously fricking delusional. He was lucky not to lose the fight. Andy Lee shown him far too much respect in the first few rounds but once Lee found his rhythm and stopped walking on to the right hand Quillin looked devoid of ideas and hardly put two punches together. His work rate was none existent from the 6th round onwards.

Speak to Bnovelist, he's clearly got the inside track of having the procedure done.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Sorry but If you had to rewind the fight and you just about caught the punch before the bell....how do you expect people in real time without the benefit of a replay to spot that?

This is no way close to an injustice the blame can be solely placed at quillns door... over weight and under estimated Lee. ..

Fair enough. It might indeed be hard to catch in real time.

But I thought someone said replay might be used in the PBC.

If so, then maybe they coulda gotten that one right.

In one replay, you can see the timer still moving as the punch is landed.

Let me clarify one more thing.

I said before the fight that a guy who doesn't make weight, whether he does it on purpose or not, is cheating.

I still believe that.

I am not upset that Quillen didn't win.

The question mark on the title of the OP means I wanted to get takes on the possibility of what happened, not make a definite statement.

There are no current boxing rules, where a replay is used to decide the outcome in such circumstances.

You are grasping at straws.

[koolkc107]

Not really. It has been used in some fights already, as far back as 2011

And 3 of the 4 major bodies plan to use it more.

[BAD INTENTIONS]

I think Quillen won. He was up by 5 points at the end of 3 rounds.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Not really. It has been used in some fights already, as far back as 2011

And 3 of the 4 major bodies plan to use it more.

What they used a replay to determine whether a fighter was knocked down or not.

What level of fight was this, and between whom?

[klitoris]

Is this thread a joke? If anything, Lee probably won a close fight.

[Horse]

Is this thread a joke? If anything, Lee probably won a close fight.

I scored it for Lee.

The draw was fair though.

[handsofstone]

I had Lee winning by a point but it really could've gone either way,I think a draw seems about right

[crusader]

I think Quillen won. He was up by 5 points at the end of 3 rounds.

Too bad for him that the fight wasn't three rounds. I thought Lee won five of the last six and with the KD that balances out a five point deficit (only four on the 113-113 card) over the first three.

[AntonS]

If fighter is winning the round 10/9 and gets knocked down score is 9/9 which is converted to 10/10
If you score it 10/9 for other guy, downed boxer has lost 2 points.

How would you score the following round?

A is giving B a belting in 1st minute of the round
A gets floored in 2nd minute of the round
A continues giving B a belting in final minute of the round

[koolkc107]

Actually, under the 10 point must system the round MUST be scored 10-8 because the Ref clearly ruled it a KD.

As for scoring a KD round 10-9, folks need to enlighten me on what criteria has to be present in order to not follow the referee's instruction.

The referee is not there to score the rounds... so that's lesson number one.

In terms of lesson number two...

According to Chuck Giampa:

• The criteria for scoring a knock down is not based on the premise that the fighter who scores the knockdown automatically is awarded a 10-8. If Fighter A is winning the round and gets knocked down by Fighter B, then Fighter B is awarded the round 10-9.

Therefore, you can't automatically award a 10-8 round for a fighter who scores a knock down without taking into consideration who won the round without the knock down.

Here are two examples to illustrate the point:

When Bert Cooper knocked down Holyfield in the third round of their bout, two of the official judges only gave him the round by a 10-9 margin due to the ferocity and dominance that Evander had during that round.

I think the same thing happened to Pacquiao during the third round of his bout against Miguel Cotto, because two of the judges thought that the Puerto Rican’s superior work-rate over the entire three minutes resulted in Manny only being awarded 10-9 on the scorecards.

Simply put: judges initially consider which fighter won the round and then they take into account any point deductions due to knock downs or fouls.

In your example and Anton's, the 10-9 round was a result of the fighter who got KD dominating everything in the round except the KD.

Totally understandable to go 10-9 there.

But, that is NOT what we saw in round 3. NOBODY dominated the round. Even without the KD it is a pick 'em round.

The ref does not score but he RULES on the KD.

And he does so in order for the judges to score the round correctly.

Obviously, one judge did not.

Like I said before, what is the difference between what the judge did in ignoring the KD and a judge ignoring a ref's instruction to deduct a point?

[AntonS]

Ref only instructs judges to deduct a point for infringement(s). Knockdown ain't it, therefore, it's up to judges to score as they see the round.
Not referring to this particular bout, this is the way I would sore a round:-

A is giving B a belting in 1st minute of the round 10/9 for A
A gets floored in 2nd minute of the round Even 10/10
A continues giving B a belting in final minute of the round 10/9 for A

Just because a guy gets floored, doesn't necessarily mean he lost the round :P

I know of couple of judges who use their index fingers to score the round as it's happening

[koolkc107]

Ref only instructs judges to deduct a point for infringement(s). Knockdown ain't it, therefore, it's up to judges to score as they see the round.

The ref makes it clear to the judges as to whether there was a KD.

For example, concerning the point I made in the OP as to 2 KDs in round one instead of one, you can clearly hear the ref between rounds making sure the judges know there was only one official KD in round one.

That is done for scoring purposes as an instruction.

[AntonS]

Ref only instructs judges to deduct a point for infringement(s). Knockdown ain't it, therefore, it's up to judges to score as they see the round.

The ref makes it clear to the judges as to whether there was a KD.

For example, concerning the point I made in the OP as to 2 KDs in round one instead of one, you can clearly hear the ref between rounds making sure the judges know there was only one official KD in round one.

That is done for scoring purposes as an instruction.

Judges & everyman & his dog can tell a knockdown, but can't do so if ref rules it slip. If he rules it slip, he instantly waves his arms across each other, which is all judges need to see.

[koolkc107]

Ref only instructs judges to deduct a point for infringement(s). Knockdown ain't it, therefore, it's up to judges to score as they see the round.

The ref makes it clear to the judges as to whether there was a KD.

For example, concerning the point I made in the OP as to 2 KDs in round one instead of one, you can clearly hear the ref between rounds making sure the judges know there was only one official KD in round one.

That is done for scoring purposes as an instruction.

Judges & everyman & his dog can tell a knockdown, but can't do so if ref rules it slip. If he rules it slip, he instantly waves his arms across each other, which is all judges need to see.

Again, ruling a slip is a scoring instruction.

Deducting for a foul is a scoring instruction.

Ruling a KD is a scoring instruction.

[drunkenpiper36]

I narrowly gave the fight to Quillen but have no problem with the draw. Let's face it, whoever received the nod in that decision was going to get booed. There needs to be a rematch.

[Horse]

I narrowly gave the fight to Quillen but have no problem with the draw. Let's face it, whoever received the nod in that decision was going to get booed. There needs to be a rematch.

Quillin came in overweight, he doesn't deserve a rematch.

[ikorolev]

I narrowly gave the fight to Quillen but have no problem with the draw. Let's face it, whoever received the nod in that decision was going to get booed. There needs to be a rematch.

Quillin came in overweight, he doesn't deserve a rematch.

... and he didn't try hard enough during the fight hoping to get a guaranteed decision from hometown judges. No rematch for the pu$$y.

[AntonS]

Again, ruling a slip is a scoring instruction.

Deducting for a foul is a scoring instruction.

Ruling a KD is a scoring instruction.

Yup! But ref only explains to judges & recorder the reason of deduction for infringement, in the event they blinked at the time & missed it. Other explanations/instructions are unnecessary. If ref resorts to it, he's simply up himself

[koolkc107]

If he was brave enough to ignore the ruling because he felt it wasn't a true KD, he should have been brave enough to score the round 10-9 for Lee, give him the round outright.

[koolkc107]

If he was brave enough to ignore the ruling because he felt it wasn't a true KD, he should have been brave enough to score the round 10-9 for Lee, give him the round outright.

Perhaps you’re right, but I don’t know if Feldman was obliged to adhere to the stipulated rules of the boxing commission and recognise the knockdown, regardless of the ref’s seemingly poor judgement? :??

Anyway, please watch round three again, because:
• Andy Lee would have won the round if the knockdown hadn’t taken place
• Peter Quillin’s knockdown was not caused by a punch

Regardless Glenn Feldman’s reasons, his decision to only award round three to Quillin by a 10-9 margin seems wholly reasonable to me.

I realize the feet got tangled.

I don't think the blows landed hurt Lee.

But KDs do not need to hurt to be KDs.

Just have the right physics.

Two punches were landed right before Lee went down, the second with Quillen's foot off of Lee's foot.

Would I have scored that a KD? No.

But I won't fault the ref there for doing so.

A punch landed on Lee's head (back rear) and he went down.

All you need to rule it a KD, bad call or no.

[AntonS]

Put it to sleep guys.....Decision was correct

[koolkc107]

Put it to sleep guys.....Decision was correct

Your opinion and you are entitled to it.

I don't think the decision was right, but I am OK with it if it means a guy who cheated the scales did not benefit from it.