How do you score the round?

[caldo2025]

It doesn’t matter what we think because judges these days are scoring the round 10-8 no matter what happens if no other knockdowns occur in the round.

Even if the knockdown call by the ref was wrong, judges will score that round 10-8 no matter what.

Look, the object of the game is to knock the other guy down or out. If a boxer loses his feet due to a legitimate punch then he should be penalized for it and the other boxer deserves a bonus. The ONLY time I’d ever score it 10-9 is if the knocked down boxer had the other boxer hanging on for dear life for rest of the round and almost down.

[oogiebe]

In thie scenario stated there was not a point deduction.
But if there is a point deduction then and only then can the winner of a round have less than 10 points.

If you read my first comment properly, you could have seen, that I was suggesting the idea, that a knockdown was a kind of a point-deduction.

No Sir a point deduction can only be applied by the ref

Point deductions (fouls) are deducted AFTER the judges score the round. So if the judge scores 10-9 and the winner is deducted a point, it's taken off at that time, and thus becomes 9-9.

[tiny_acres]

If you read my first comment properly, you could have seen, that I was suggesting the idea, that a knockdown was a kind of a point-deduction.

No Sir a point deduction can only be applied by the ref

Point deductions (fouls) are deducted AFTER the judges score the round. So if the judge scores 10-9 and the winner is deducted a point, it's taken off at that time, and thus becomes 9-9.

That is what I have been saying.

[DrDuke]

In thie scenario stated there was not a point deduction.
But if there is a point deduction then and only then can the winner of a round have less than 10 points.

If you read my first comment properly, you could have seen, that I was suggesting the idea, that a knockdown was a kind of a point-deduction.

No Sir a point deduction can only be applied by the ref

I'm actually not insisting on putting exactly 9-9, it can be 10-10, the idea is more about the way of scoring such rounds, which is scoring them even. The winner should have 10-9, but being knocked down costs a point, however, by the rules of the logic the winner can't be taken 2 points because of the not important knockdown, which isn't more valuable, than just a regular clean, but not damaging punch, so it's more fair to take only 1 point from the round's winner instead of 2. And, if 10 points are so obligatory, than the obtained 9-9 can easily be risen to 10-10.

[oogiebe]

No Sir a point deduction can only be applied by the ref

Point deductions (fouls) are deducted AFTER the judges score the round. So if the judge scores 10-9 and the winner is deducted a point, it's taken off at that time, and thus becomes 9-9.

That is what I have been saying.

Just providing you backup.

[oogiebe]

If you read my first comment properly, you could have seen, that I was suggesting the idea, that a knockdown was a kind of a point-deduction.

No Sir a point deduction can only be applied by the ref

I'm actually not insisting on putting exactly 9-9, it can be 10-10, the idea is more about the way of scoring such rounds, which is scoring them even. The winner should have 10-9, but being knocked down costs a point, however, by the rules of the logic the winner can't be taken 2 points because of the not important knockdown, which isn't more valuable, than just a regular clean, but not damaging punch, so it's more fair to take only 1 point from the round's winner instead of 2. And, if 10 points are so obligatory, than the obtained 9-9 can easily be risen to 10-10.

You may find logic in what you say, but it's not the rule.

[ValMar]

All that stuff is pretty irrelevent if you're a boxing judge. You simply score it the way the mugs who hired you instructed you to score the rounds.

In the movies maybe.

Ilya is right, at least 80 %...................

[squiggy]

I think that fighters who score a knockdown are usually doubly privileged by the judges: In addition to removing a point from the knocked-down fighter, they almost always assume that the other guy won the round. I wouldn't score that way. Obviously, in considering who won the round, I would still count the landed blow that caused the knockdown. But because I was about the subtract a point for the knockdown anyway, I'd try to remove the knockdown from my consideration of who won that round. Therefore I consider it possible to score an even round wherein the guy who scored a knockdown was otherwise outfought.

[oogiebe]

I think that fighters who score a knockdown are usually doubly privileged by the judges: In addition to removing a point from the knocked-down fighter, they almost always assume that the other guy won the round. I wouldn't score that way. Obviously, in considering who won the round, I would still count the landed blow that caused the knockdown. But because I was about the subtract a point for the knockdown anyway, I'd try to remove the knockdown from my consideration of who won that round. Therefore I consider it possible to score an even round wherein the guy who scored a knockdown was otherwise outfought.

So you would have it 10-10

[Ricky]

There is a very rare occasion in boxing when a fighter is so dominant he gets a 10-8 even though there wasn't a knockdown.

That's the level of dominance a fighter needs to lose a round 10-9 instead of 10-8 if he goes down.

[oogiebe]

There is a very rare occasion in boxing when a fighter is so dominant he gets a 10-8 even though there wasn't a knockdown.

That's the level of dominance a fighter needs to lose a round 10-9 instead of 10-8 if he goes down.

Yup. I've seen guys get bounced all around the ring, but not onto it, but still lose 10-8. Rare, but yes it happens. In fact I wouldn't have complained if the seventh frame of Wilder/Ortiz was scored 10-8. I'm a Wilder fan, but that was total dominance for 120 of 180 seconds or more.

[Ricky]

There is a very rare occasion in boxing when a fighter is so dominant he gets a 10-8 even though there wasn't a knockdown.

That's the level of dominance a fighter needs to lose a round 10-9 instead of 10-8 if he goes down.

Yup. I've seen guys get bounced all around the ring, but not onto it, but still lose 10-8. Rare, but yes it happens. In fact I wouldn't have complained if the seventh frame of Wilder/Ortiz was scored 10-8. I'm a Wilder fan, but that was total dominance for 120 of 180 seconds or more.

I think 1 judge did give 10-8?

[oogiebe]

There is a very rare occasion in boxing when a fighter is so dominant he gets a 10-8 even though there wasn't a knockdown.

That's the level of dominance a fighter needs to lose a round 10-9 instead of 10-8 if he goes down.

Yup. I've seen guys get bounced all around the ring, but not onto it, but still lose 10-8. Rare, but yes it happens. In fact I wouldn't have complained if the seventh frame of Wilder/Ortiz was scored 10-8. I'm a Wilder fan, but that was total dominance for 120 of 180 seconds or more.

I think 1 judge did give 10-8?

I really don't remember, but it's a decent example.

[jamamb]

why should a not big knockdown by weighted 2 points more then 2:50 of a thorough outboxing (but not 10-8 absolute thrashing) for example? the 2:50 represents way more sustained success and the fighter was never really that hurt from the kd

lets say the one guy lands far more, way cleaner, way more accurate, cuts his opponent, etc for nearly all round. whats so 2 point difference good about a kd that doesnt even hurt him

[oogiebe]

why should a not big knockdown by weighted 2 points more then 2:50 of a thorough outboxing (but not 10-8 absolute thrashing) for example? the 2:50 represents way more sustained success and the fighter was never really that hurt from the kd

lets say the one guy lands far more, way cleaner, way more accurate, cuts his opponent, etc for nearly all round. whats so 2 point difference good about a kd that doesnt even hurt him

It may not weigh more, depending on the actual dominance and the judge scoring. It just has to be a real thrashing to offset a knockdown, no matter if it was the 'flash' or a real hammering.