Round-by-Round: Jack Catterall vs. Ohara Davies - 6 October 2018

[Ruthless-RKO]

Has Yigit vacated the Euro belt? Catterall needs to move on now.

[Boxerbeetle]

Has Catterall ever been in a decent fight ? His bouts seem wall to wall snoozefests...I fast forwarded through that and will be glad to never see one of his fights again

The Stalker fight was good. That’s about it.

[skanksta]

Exactly. A ten point must system. 10-10. You'd be surprised how many people get that wrong.

I remember saying, exactly this on this forum - only for the consensus to 'correct' me as follows..
"The 10 pt 'MUST' system doesn't apply to deducted points - they are deducted after" thus 9-9.

Which is right ?!

[Boxerbeetle]

My pet hate is where someone gets knocked down and the commentators always say ‘it’s a 10-8 round’. Not necessarily, you fvckwits.

[Glass Joe]

didn't take long. denial is the first step to acceptance

[jameswilson]

Exactly. A ten point must system. 10-10. You'd be surprised how many people get that wrong.

I remember saying, exactly this on this forum - only for the consensus to 'correct' me as follows..
"The 10 pt 'MUST' system doesn't apply to deducted points - they are deducted after" thus 9-9.

Which is right ?!

Khan v Peterson official card from a judge was posted confirming 9-9 and 9-8 scores for individual rounds where points were deducted.

[handsofstone]

Has Catterall ever been in a decent fight ? His bouts seem wall to wall snoozefests...I fast forwarded through that and will be glad to never see one of his fights again

The Stalker fight was good. That’s about it.

The thing with Catterall is that he's pretty effective when he's aggressive, he is a decent counter puncher as well TBF but needs to press fights more, with the skills he has, he should be a boxer who starts patient then get busier every round but workrate wise he looks a bit naive

No really sure what Davies plan was last night

[prewarboxing]

Exactly. A ten point must system. 10-10. You'd be surprised how many people get that wrong.

I remember saying, exactly this on this forum - only for the consensus to 'correct' me as follows..
"The 10 pt 'MUST' system doesn't apply to deducted points - they are deducted after" thus 9-9.

Which is right ?!

10-10 is the only correct score in the UK. 9-9 is WRONG.

It is a 10 point must system.

One boxer MUST score at least 10. Therefore under the situation I described earlier the round is scored 10-10. There is no such thing as a 9-9 round. This is why I brought this up. So many people get it wrong

Miles Templeton

[prewarboxing]

Exactly. A ten point must system. 10-10. You'd be surprised how many people get that wrong.

I remember saying, exactly this on this forum - only for the consensus to 'correct' me as follows..
"The 10 pt 'MUST' system doesn't apply to deducted points - they are deducted after" thus 9-9.

Which is right ?!

Khan v Peterson official card from a judge was posted confirming 9-9 and 9-8 scores for individual rounds where points were deducted.

I don't know for sure but this may have been different because the bout was fought under different rules to the BBBofC as it was World or European. But in the UK for a domestic bout it is 10 point must.

This is why I raised the topic when I saw the reference to 108-108.

It is interesting and catches a lot of people out.

Miles Templeton.

[prewarboxing]

My pet hate is where someone gets knocked down and the commentators always say ‘it’s a 10-8 round’. Not necessarily, you fvckwits.

You are quite right. A knockdown does NOT automatically mean 10-8 in the UK. It usually does but it does not have to.

Miles Templeton

[Andrew]

Caught up with everything.

Poor card before the Sharo v Woodstock contest.

Like I have said a fair few times. Ohara Davies just isn't very good, the power is a myth, then again Catterrall wasn't impressive, he just did a bit more. Really dissapointed in the fight because going into it I thought it was excellent matchmaking. I also expected Caterrall to get the stoppage.

[Boxerbeetle]

Caught up with everything.

Poor card before the Sharo v Woodstock contest.

Like I have said a fair few times. Ohara Davies just isn't very good, the power is a myth, then again Catterrall wasn't impressive, he just did a bit more. Really dissapointed in the fight because going into it I thought it was excellent matchmaking. I also expected Caterrall to get the stoppage.

Yeah you can’t criticise the matchmaking, I also thought it would be a good competitive fight and pretty sure most people on here agreed. Unfortunately stinkers can happen no matter what.

[Oiky]

The styles just didn't gel did they

[Stuarty]

I was gonna rewatch this today but I'd rather go for lunch at Pret a Manger than watch this AIDS again

[olij999]

Exactly. A ten point must system. 10-10. You'd be surprised how many people get that wrong.

I remember saying, exactly this on this forum - only for the consensus to 'correct' me as follows..
"The 10 pt 'MUST' system doesn't apply to deducted points - they are deducted after" thus 9-9.

Which is right ?!

10-10 is the only correct score in the UK. 9-9 is WRONG.

It is a 10 point must system.

One boxer MUST score at least 10. Therefore under the situation I described earlier the round is scored 10-10. There is no such thing as a 9-9 round. This is why I brought this up. So many people get it wrong

Miles Templeton

Myles - with the very greatest of respect, as I'm aware of your deep knowledge of a whole load of areas in this sport, you're not right on this one. Points deducted for fouls come off after the round has been scored on the 10-point must system - it is the only exception to the "10-point must" principle. This can be show in different ways, but the outcome is the same. For example:

- on the Referee's Score Sheet that the single referee fills in, if fighter A wins the round 10-9 but is deducted a point for fouls, that is shown as 10 points to A, 9 points to B but with a note in the "Remarks" column of "-1 Boxer A", which is then factored in to the "Total Marks" column (i.e. net 9 is added to fighter A's score). This is in the BBBofC Referees Guide, if you have a copy of the revised 2014 edition - there is an example scoresheet on page 46 which shows this.

-taking last night's fights as an example for contests with three judges (as I was Area Rep helping to collate the scores at the show), the cards that the three judges fill in each round (i.e. in the UK the white, blue and pink ones) which the ref collects from them at the end of each round have three lines on them - line 1 is to score the round on the 10-point must system, taking into account knockdowns; line 2 separately records points deducted for fouls; and line 3 gives the net result. So while a round where fighter A and fighter B are both knocked down has to have one fighter getting 10 points (as that does fall within the 10-point-must principle, so is all recorded on line 1 of the card), it is different if a fighter wins a "normal" round with no knockdowns, so usually a 10-9, but has a point deducted for fouls. That comes out as net 9-9.

So there is no grossing up back to 10-10. There are examples of this in action - in recent weeks, I saw a 59-54 in Boxing News in a six rounder where fighter A won all 6 rounds,, no knockdowns, but lost a point for fouls (although I would have to trawl through to find the report!). I have never once seen a round with a point deducted for fouls scored 10-10 after the point deduction.

Hope that helps the discussion.

[prewarboxing]

I remember saying, exactly this on this forum - only for the consensus to 'correct' me as follows..
"The 10 pt 'MUST' system doesn't apply to deducted points - they are deducted after" thus 9-9.

Which is right ?!

10-10 is the only correct score in the UK. 9-9 is WRONG.

It is a 10 point must system.

One boxer MUST score at least 10. Therefore under the situation I described earlier the round is scored 10-10. There is no such thing as a 9-9 round. This is why I brought this up. So many people get it wrong

Miles Templeton

Myles - with the very greatest of respect, as I'm aware of your deep knowledge of a whole load of areas in this sport, you're not right on this one. Points deducted for fouls come off after the round has been scored on the 10-point must system - it is the only exception to the "10-point must" principle. This can be show in different ways, but the outcome is the same. For example:

- on the Referee's Score Sheet that the single referee fills in, if fighter A wins the round 10-9 but is deducted a point for fouls, that is shown as 10 points to A, 9 points to B but with a note in the "Remarks" column of "-1 Boxer A", which is then factored in to the "Total Marks" column (i.e. net 9 is added to fighter A's score). This is in the BBBofC Referees Guide, if you have a copy of the revised 2014 edition - there is an example scoresheet on page 46 which shows this.

-taking last night's fights as an example for contests with three judges (as I was Area Rep helping to collate the scores at the show), the cards that the three judges fill in each round (i.e. in the UK the white, blue and pink ones) which the ref collects from them at the end of each round have three lines on them - line 1 is to score the round on the 10-point must system, taking into account knockdowns; line 2 separately records points deducted for fouls; and line 3 gives the net result. So while a round where fighter A and fighter B are both knocked down has to have one fighter getting 10 points (as that does fall within the 10-point-must principle, so is all recorded on line 1 of the card), it is different if a fighter wins a "normal" round with no knockdowns, so usually a 10-9, but has a point deducted for fouls. That comes out as net 9-9.

So there is no grossing up back to 10-10. There are examples of this in action - in recent weeks, I saw a 59-54 in Boxing News in a six rounder where fighter A won all 6 rounds,, no knockdowns, but lost a point for fouls (although I would have to trawl through to find the report!). I have never once seen a round with a point deducted for fouls scored 10-10 after the point deduction.

Hope that helps the discussion.

This is really interesting and I completely respect what you say. I may know less than I think I do! I am going to follow this up to find out more. Can I pm you?

[olij999]

10-10 is the only correct score in the UK. 9-9 is WRONG.

It is a 10 point must system.

One boxer MUST score at least 10. Therefore under the situation I described earlier the round is scored 10-10. There is no such thing as a 9-9 round. This is why I brought this up. So many people get it wrong

Miles Templeton

Myles - with the very greatest of respect, as I'm aware of your deep knowledge of a whole load of areas in this sport, you're not right on this one. Points deducted for fouls come off after the round has been scored on the 10-point must system - it is the only exception to the "10-point must" principle. This can be show in different ways, but the outcome is the same. For example:

- on the Referee's Score Sheet that the single referee fills in, if fighter A wins the round 10-9 but is deducted a point for fouls, that is shown as 10 points to A, 9 points to B but with a note in the "Remarks" column of "-1 Boxer A", which is then factored in to the "Total Marks" column (i.e. net 9 is added to fighter A's score). This is in the BBBofC Referees Guide, if you have a copy of the revised 2014 edition - there is an example scoresheet on page 46 which shows this.

-taking last night's fights as an example for contests with three judges (as I was Area Rep helping to collate the scores at the show), the cards that the three judges fill in each round (i.e. in the UK the white, blue and pink ones) which the ref collects from them at the end of each round have three lines on them - line 1 is to score the round on the 10-point must system, taking into account knockdowns; line 2 separately records points deducted for fouls; and line 3 gives the net result. So while a round where fighter A and fighter B are both knocked down has to have one fighter getting 10 points (as that does fall within the 10-point-must principle, so is all recorded on line 1 of the card), it is different if a fighter wins a "normal" round with no knockdowns, so usually a 10-9, but has a point deducted for fouls. That comes out as net 9-9.

So there is no grossing up back to 10-10. There are examples of this in action - in recent weeks, I saw a 59-54 in Boxing News in a six rounder where fighter A won all 6 rounds,, no knockdowns, but lost a point for fouls (although I would have to trawl through to find the report!). I have never once seen a round with a point deducted for fouls scored 10-10 after the point deduction.

Hope that helps the discussion.

This is really interesting and I completely respect what you say. I may know less than I think I do! I am going to follow this up to find out more. Can I pm you?

Of course!

[Ruthless-RKO]

10-10 is the only correct score in the UK. 9-9 is WRONG.

It is a 10 point must system.

One boxer MUST score at least 10. Therefore under the situation I described earlier the round is scored 10-10. There is no such thing as a 9-9 round. This is why I brought this up. So many people get it wrong

Miles Templeton

Myles - with the very greatest of respect, as I'm aware of your deep knowledge of a whole load of areas in this sport, you're not right on this one. Points deducted for fouls come off after the round has been scored on the 10-point must system - it is the only exception to the "10-point must" principle. This can be show in different ways, but the outcome is the same. For example:

- on the Referee's Score Sheet that the single referee fills in, if fighter A wins the round 10-9 but is deducted a point for fouls, that is shown as 10 points to A, 9 points to B but with a note in the "Remarks" column of "-1 Boxer A", which is then factored in to the "Total Marks" column (i.e. net 9 is added to fighter A's score). This is in the BBBofC Referees Guide, if you have a copy of the revised 2014 edition - there is an example scoresheet on page 46 which shows this.

-taking last night's fights as an example for contests with three judges (as I was Area Rep helping to collate the scores at the show), the cards that the three judges fill in each round (i.e. in the UK the white, blue and pink ones) which the ref collects from them at the end of each round have three lines on them - line 1 is to score the round on the 10-point must system, taking into account knockdowns; line 2 separately records points deducted for fouls; and line 3 gives the net result. So while a round where fighter A and fighter B are both knocked down has to have one fighter getting 10 points (as that does fall within the 10-point-must principle, so is all recorded on line 1 of the card), it is different if a fighter wins a "normal" round with no knockdowns, so usually a 10-9, but has a point deducted for fouls. That comes out as net 9-9.

So there is no grossing up back to 10-10. There are examples of this in action - in recent weeks, I saw a 59-54 in Boxing News in a six rounder where fighter A won all 6 rounds,, no knockdowns, but lost a point for fouls (although I would have to trawl through to find the report!). I have never once seen a round with a point deducted for fouls scored 10-10 after the point deduction.

Hope that helps the discussion.

This is really interesting and I completely respect what you say. I may know less than I think I do! I am going to follow this up to find out more. Can I pm you?

Here is a template of what he means.



It says round points then points deducted. Then the net score which is what counts.

[skanksta]

I was gonna rewatch this today but I'd rather go for lunch at Pret a Manger than watch this AIDS again

Definitely using this one

[Ruthless-RKO]

I was gonna rewatch this today but I'd rather go for lunch at Pret a Manger than watch this AIDS again

Definitely using this one

Another person has gotten sick apparently.

[skanksta]

I remember saying, exactly this on this forum - only for the consensus to 'correct' me as follows..
"The 10 pt 'MUST' system doesn't apply to deducted points - they are deducted after" thus 9-9.

Which is right ?!

10-10 is the only correct score in the UK. 9-9 is WRONG.

It is a 10 point must system.

One boxer MUST score at least 10. Therefore under the situation I described earlier the round is scored 10-10. There is no such thing as a 9-9 round. This is why I brought this up. So many people get it wrong

Miles Templeton

Myles - with the very greatest of respect, as I'm aware of your deep knowledge of a whole load of areas in this sport, you're not right on this one. Points deducted for fouls come off after the round has been scored on the 10-point must system - it is the only exception to the "10-point must" principle. This can be show in different ways, but the outcome is the same. For example:

- on the Referee's Score Sheet that the single referee fills in, if fighter A wins the round 10-9 but is deducted a point for fouls, that is shown as 10 points to A, 9 points to B but with a note in the "Remarks" column of "-1 Boxer A", which is then factored in to the "Total Marks" column (i.e. net 9 is added to fighter A's score). This is in the BBBofC Referees Guide, if you have a copy of the revised 2014 edition - there is an example scoresheet on page 46 which shows this.

-taking last night's fights as an example for contests with three judges (as I was Area Rep helping to collate the scores at the show), the cards that the three judges fill in each round (i.e. in the UK the white, blue and pink ones) which the ref collects from them at the end of each round have three lines on them - line 1 is to score the round on the 10-point must system, taking into account knockdowns; line 2 separately records points deducted for fouls; and line 3 gives the net result. So while a round where fighter A and fighter B are both knocked down has to have one fighter getting 10 points (as that does fall within the 10-point-must principle, so is all recorded on line 1 of the card), it is different if a fighter wins a "normal" round with no knockdowns, so usually a 10-9, but has a point deducted for fouls. That comes out as net 9-9.

So there is no grossing up back to 10-10. There are examples of this in action - in recent weeks, I saw a 59-54 in Boxing News in a six rounder where fighter A won all 6 rounds,, no knockdowns, but lost a point for fouls (although I would have to trawl through to find the report!). I have never once seen a round with a point deducted for fouls scored 10-10 after the point deduction.

Hope that helps the discussion.

The plot thickens
Please post what you find out. IF it turns out it should be 9-9 then whoever invented the phrase, "10 point MUST system" has a lot to answer for !

[skanksta]

In fact...

Someone should put this on a new thread with any evidence, etc.

[keirw]

Dubois vs Johnson was a typical Kevin Johnson fight, which will do Dubois no harm in the long run, but was not a great watch.

Catterall vs Davies was a terrible fight, Catterall won by just feinting more and landing a couple more punches here and there.

Woodstock vs Sharpe was a cracker though, i thought Sharpe won by a few rounds but Woodstock just kept coming and made him work hard for the victory.

I watched it with a couple casual mates and I'm glad they put the Woodstock vs Sharpe fight on last as they may never have wanted to come over to watch another boxing card again.

[Ezzard]

Woodstock's trunks were actually on his belt line. Archie's were under his armpits, as is usual. Maybe Leon's team need to be a little more savvy with this sort of thing.