BoxRec

fox wrote:The fight was pretty close but I thought Mundine should have won. Could have scored a couple of rounds 10-10 but you have to go one way or the other. Thought Mundine's defense was pretty good and his jab was landing much better. 6 rounds to 4 but can't argue if some go the other way. JMO.

Close fights are hard to score. We all know that. I had it close and can understand how people could see either winning.

bogan whisperer wrote:

AntonS wrote:If Mundine was ahead 10/9 in the round, after 1pt deduction it's 9/9......converted to 10/10 under 10 must system.

Thanks for the clarification. But it was Green who got deducted the point in the 7th round.

So the judge must have had it Green 10/9.

Then deducted Green to make it 9/9.

Before applying the 10 must and making it 10/10.

Sorry, I meant Green. Concentration is at its best today

AntonS wrote:

bogan whisperer wrote:

AntonS wrote:If Mundine was ahead 10/9 in the round, after 1pt deduction it's 9/9......converted to 10/10 under 10 must system.

Thanks for the clarification. But it was Green who got deducted the point in the 7th round.

So the judge must have had it Green 10/9.

Then deducted Green to make it 9/9.

Before applying the 10 must and making it 10/10.

Sorry, I meant Green. Concentration is at its best today

I thought that rounds where the winner was deducted a point were still scored as a 9-9 round? I'm pretty sure I've seen that before under the 10 point must system. If the penalty is applied after the round has been scored it does make sense.

Edit to add it says so here as well. Will see if I can find other examples.

http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/918 ... int-system

Quote from wiki

The most widely used scoring system since the mid-twentieth century is the "10-point must system", so named because a judge "must" award ten points to at least one fighter each round (before deductions for fouls). Most rounds are scored 10-9, with 10 points for the fighter who won the round, and 9 points for the fighter the judge believes lost the round. If a round is judged to be even, it is scored 10-10. For each knockdown in a round, the judge deducts an additional point from the fighter knocked down, resulting in a 10-8 score if there is one knockdown or a 10-7 score if there are two knockdowns. If the referee instructs the judges to deduct a point for a foul, this deduction is applied after the preliminary computation. So, if a fighter wins a round, but is penalized for a foul, the score changes from 10-9 to 9-9. If that same fighter scored a knockdown in the round, the score would change from 10-8 in his favor to 9-8.

he ignored the fact the ref took a point off cause it was pathetic. mundine did the same thing probably more than 20 times and even hit the ref ffs, seriously, he hits the ref on the chin and the ref does nothing at all, lol, and only had a point deducted cause green was concussed for one of them. mundine could have been disqualified so many times it was a joke.

paul kent talks more garbage than our own resident goose on here and gets paid to be controversial.

and someone dingaling on here had the gall to call barry Michael a straight shooter, pmsl.
barry Michael has been licking mundines rear since he first put the gloves on. he's his no.1 fan for Christ sake.

Lairdy wrote:

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:I agree with Jeff Fenech he was asked will there be a third fight he almost laughed and said ''what for Danny was 20 pound's heavier and in 30 minute's of fighting he[Danny] could not land one clean shot on a man that was the third the size of him and Fenech also said ''he feels sorry for Chock because he won clearly'' and Barry Michael another straight shooter like Fenech said something similar Mundine won clearly and that there shouldn't be a third fight...............

94-94 = a bad night judging
96-94 Green = clearly bias
98-90 Green = as much as i hate to say it. This is proof there is still corruption in Australian sport.

I hope Mundine appeals this and it is given a NC or MD Draw. He doesn't deserve to finish his career like that. I felt sick when that decision was made.

Anything is possible in Aussie boxing.

https://thewest.com.au/sport/boxing/joh ... b88376580z

buster007 wrote:he ignored the fact the ref took a point off cause it was pathetic. mundine did the same thing probably more than 20 times and even hit the ref ffs, seriously, he hits the ref on the chin and the ref does nothing at all, lol, and only had a point deducted cause green was concussed for one of them. mundine could have been disqualified so many times it was a joke.

paul kent talks more garbage than our own resident goose on here and gets paid to be controversial.

and someone dingaling on here had the gall to call barry Michael a straight shooter, pmsl.
barry Michael has been licking mundines rear since he first put the gloves on. he's his no.1 fan for Christ sake.

Sakio Bika has come out & said Mundine clearly won, is that good enough for you? Respectful enough? I can put together an extende list for you, Daniel Geales wife even said the decision was wrong, she is far from a Mundine fan

AntonS wrote:If Mundine was ahead 10/9 in the round, after 1pt deduction it's 9/9......converted to 10/10 under 10 must system.

Find me where it states that in the rules, and I'll believe that a fighter can have a point deducted, yet still get 10 points in a round. It completely defeats the purpose of taking the point in the first place.

GhostBoxing15 wrote:

buster007 wrote:he ignored the fact the ref took a point off cause it was pathetic. mundine did the same thing probably more than 20 times and even hit the ref ffs, seriously, he hits the ref on the chin and the ref does nothing at all, lol, and only had a point deducted cause green was concussed for one of them. mundine could have been disqualified so many times it was a joke.

paul kent talks more garbage than our own resident goose on here and gets paid to be controversial.

and someone dingaling on here had the gall to call barry Michael a straight shooter, pmsl.
barry Michael has been licking mundines rear since he first put the gloves on. he's his no.1 fan for Christ sake.

Sakio Bika has come out & said Mundine clearly won, is that good enough for you? Respectful enough? I can put together an extende list for you, Daniel Geales wife even said the decision was wrong, she is far from a Mundine fan

I see what buster007 is getting at here. There were 6 people that watched that fight that thought Green won... And probably 1,000,000 that think he didn't. But that's a whole 6 people man!

Lairdy wrote:

AntonS wrote:If Mundine was ahead 10/9 in the round, after 1pt deduction it's 9/9......converted to 10/10 under 10 must system.

Find me where it states that in the rules, and I'll believe that a fighter can have a point deducted, yet still get 10 points in a round. It completely defeats the purpose of taking the point in the first place.

It makes no difference to the outcome of the fight whether the round is written up as 9-9 or 10-10 after the point has been deducted.

Lairdy wrote:

AntonS wrote:If Mundine was ahead 10/9 in the round, after 1pt deduction it's 9/9......converted to 10/10 under 10 must system.

Find me where it states that in the rules, and I'll believe that a fighter can have a point deducted, yet still get 10 points in a round. It completely defeats the purpose of taking the point in the first place.

I meant Green....corrected in a later post. A judge had him 10/9 before deduction, making it 9/9 even round, which is 10/10 under 10 must system. Done a bit of recording in my time, so I got a good knowledge of the system. The fight was contested under ANBF rules & such is the scoring system. I guess you would be happier if final score was 95/93 & not 96/94 ?

It is only from Wiki. But for what it is worth :

10 Must Scoring System

The most widely used scoring system since the mid-twentieth century is the "10-point must system", so named because a judge "must" award ten points to at least one fighter each round (before deductions for fouls). Most rounds are scored 10-9, with 10 points for the fighter who won the round, and 9 points for the fighter the judge believes lost the round. If a round is judged to be even, it is scored 10-10. For each knockdown in a round, the judge deducts an additional point from the fighter knocked down, resulting in a 10-8 score if there is one knockdown or a 10-7 score if there are two knockdowns.

If the referee instructs the judges to deduct a point for a foul, this deduction is applied after the preliminary computation. So, if a fighter wins a round, but is penalized for a foul, the score changes from 10-9 to 9-9. If that same fighter scored a knockdown in the round, the score would change from 10-8 in his favor to 9-8.

source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_boxing

Wiki is from time to time inaccurate & certainly is this case. One or the other or both must be warded 10 points.....hence 10 points must sytem

AntonS wrote:Wiki is rarely accurate & certainly is this case. One or the other or both must be warded 10 points.....hence 10 points must sytem

Also, when I was doing my judges ticket with Qld branch of ANBF, I was told not to score even rounds. That's where you go to ring generalship, effective aggressiveness etc.

fox wrote:

AntonS wrote:Wiki is rarely accurate & certainly is this case. One or the other or both must be awarded 10 points.....hence 10 points must sytem

Also, when I was doing my judges ticket with Qld branch of ANBF, I was told not to score even rounds. That's where you go to ring generalship, effective aggressiveness etc.

Yeah! But at times it can be difficult to split them.

AntonS wrote:Wiki is from time to time inaccurate & certainly is this case. One or the other or both must be awarded 10 points.....hence 10 points must sytem

Logical enough for me

AntonS wrote:

fox wrote:

AntonS wrote:Wiki is rarely accurate & certainly is this case. One or the other or both must be awarded 10 points.....hence 10 points must sytem

Also, when I was doing my judges ticket with Qld branch of ANBF, I was told not to score even rounds. That's where you go to ring generalship, effective aggressiveness etc.

Yeah! But at times it can be difficult to split them.

Yes and I know a few Qld officials still score the even round. That's just what I was told by a senior ref and judge.

ANBF Rules

34. SCORING

(1)
Scoring shall be by the ‘Ten Points Must’ system. Winner of the round must be awarded ten points while the loser receives anywhere from nine to six points, depending on the decisiveness by which the round was won.

(2)
Even round 10 – 10
Slight edge 10 – 9
Wide edge 10 – 8
One-sided 10 – 7
Overwhelming 10 – 6
(One-point deduction is mandatory for a knockdown)

(3)
The elements of the number of blows landed, clean hitting, weight of blows, offence, defence, ring generalship and sportsmanship shall be considered. A clean knockdown will command a one-point advantage to the boxer delivering such a blow, apart from other points gained or lost in that round.

(4) Scoring blow is a punch landed on the scoring part of the body, such being neither deflected nor partially blocked, and landed with a closed knuckle part of the glove.

(5)
The scoring part of the body is the front and side parts of the body formed by an imaginary line starting from the top of the head, splitting the ears and running down the shoulders and sides and across the front of the body to the top of hip bones (belt line)

(6)
Drawn round should be avoided whenever possible unless, after all elements are taken into account, a judge cannot separate the boxers.

When next you go to a show or sit at home in front of TV or PC stream, focus into rule 3 & 4 and score accordingly

Lairdy wrote:

GhostBoxing15 wrote:

buster007 wrote:he ignored the fact the ref took a point off cause it was pathetic. mundine did the same thing probably more than 20 times and even hit the ref ffs, seriously, he hits the ref on the chin and the ref does nothing at all, lol, and only had a point deducted cause green was concussed for one of them. mundine could have been disqualified so many times it was a joke.

paul kent talks more garbage than our own resident goose on here and gets paid to be controversial.

and someone dingaling on here had the gall to call barry Michael a straight shooter, pmsl.
barry Michael has been licking mundines rear since he first put the gloves on. he's his no.1 fan for Christ sake.

Sakio Bika has come out & said Mundine clearly won, is that good enough for you? Respectful enough? I can put together an extende list for you, Daniel Geales wife even said the decision was wrong, she is far from a Mundine fan

I see what buster007 is getting at here. There were 6 people that watched that fight that thought Green won... And probably 1,000,000 that think he didn't. But that's a whole 6 people man!

Like a Boss wrote:

Lairdy wrote:

AntonS wrote:If Mundine was ahead 10/9 in the round, after 1pt deduction it's 9/9......converted to 10/10 under 10 must system.

Find me where it states that in the rules, and I'll believe that a fighter can have a point deducted, yet still get 10 points in a round. It completely defeats the purpose of taking the point in the first place.

It makes no difference to the outcome of the fight whether the round is written up as 9-9 or 10-10 after the point has been deducted.

Yes is does and you know It does the 70 year old Mr Minn scored round 7 10-9 Mundine as did the second judge who scored a draw after 10 he had round 7 10-9 Mundine then both these judge's took the 1 point off Green that then made their round 7 score 10-8 Mundine the other bloke who ended up with a win for Green after 10 96-94 had round 7 10-10 even and from what I watched Mundine won round 7 so I then take the point deduction that round is also 10-8 Mundine so instead of a 96-94 after 10 Mr Amnesia final score should have read 94-94 so at the very best for Team Green it should have been a draw as for the ref and the 5 minute rest that's the corners fault not just the ref by the way does anyone know who picked the ref and the three judge's

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:

Lairdy wrote: Find me where it states that in the rules, and I'll believe that a fighter can have a point deducted, yet still get 10 points in a round. It completely defeats the purpose of taking the point in the first place.

It makes no difference to the outcome of the fight whether the round is written up as 9-9 or 10-10 after the point has been deducted.

Yes is does and you know It does the 70 year old Mr Minn scored round 7 10-9 Mundine as did the second judge who scored a draw after 10 he had round 7 10-9 Mundine then both these judge's took the 1 point off Green that then made their round 7 score 10-8 Mundine the other bloke who ended up with a win for Green after 10 96-94 had round 7 10-10 even and from what I watched Mundine won round 7 so I then take the point deduction that round is also 10-8 Mundine so instead of a 96-94 after 10 Mr Amnesia final score should have read 94-94 so at the very best for Team Green it should have been a draw as for the ref and the 5 minute rest that's the corners fault not just the ref by the way does anyone know who picked the ref and the three judge's

It makes no difference to the outcome of the fight whether the round is written up as 9-9 or 10-10 after the point has been deducted.

The first judge on the scorecard, Morrow, is the one who changed his round 7 score from 9-9 to 10-10.

The only difference it made on his scorecard was he had it 96-94 for Green instead of 95-93 for Green. It doesn't change who he had winning the fight.

who was the galah on here who said barry Michael was a straight shooter? lol

this is the same barry who has been riding mundine for over a decade, pmsl.

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:

Lairdy wrote: Find me where it states that in the rules, and I'll believe that a fighter can have a point deducted, yet still get 10 points in a round. It completely defeats the purpose of taking the point in the first place.

It makes no difference to the outcome of the fight whether the round is written up as 9-9 or 10-10 after the point has been deducted.

Yes is does and you know It does the 70 year old Mr Minn scored round 7 10-9 Mundine as did the second judge who scored a draw after 10 he had round 7 10-9 Mundine then both these judge's took the 1 point off Green that then made their round 7 score 10-8 Mundine the other bloke who ended up with a win for Green after 10 96-94 had round 7 10-10 even and from what I watched Mundine won round 7 so I then take the point deduction that round is also 10-8 Mundine so instead of a 96-94 after 10 Mr Amnesia final score should have read 94-94 so at the very best for Team Green it should have been a draw as for the ref and the 5 minute rest that's the corners fault not just the ref by the way does anyone know who picked the ref and the three judge's

Good question. Judge Ferrauto is South Oz boxing & kickboxing judge/referee. My understating, unless "world title" overseas appointees are disallowed in every State.
In US, numerous States (particularly Nevada) disallows "world title" appointments if not registered official in Nevada

AntonS wrote:ANBF Rules

34. SCORING

(1)
Scoring shall be by the ‘Ten Points Must’ system. Winner of the round must be awarded ten points while the loser receives anywhere from nine to six points, depending on the decisiveness by which the round was won.

(2)
Even round 10 – 10
Slight edge 10 – 9
Wide edge 10 – 8
One-sided 10 – 7
Overwhelming 10 – 6
(One-point deduction is mandatory for a knockdown)

(3)
The elements of the number of blows landed, clean hitting, weight of blows, offence, defence, ring generalship and sportsmanship shall be considered. A clean knockdown will command a one-point advantage to the boxer delivering such a blow, apart from other points gained or lost in that round.

(4) Scoring blow is a punch landed on the scoring part of the body, such being neither deflected nor partially blocked, and landed with a closed knuckle part of the glove.

(5)
The scoring part of the body is the front and side parts of the body formed by an imaginary line starting from the top of the head, splitting the ears and running down the shoulders and sides and across the front of the body to the top of hip bones (belt line)

(6)
Drawn round should be avoided whenever possible unless, after all elements are taken into account, a judge cannot separate the boxers.

So, if there is a knock down, the "one point deduction is mandatory"... All's i learnt from Friday night was that when a referee gives a one point deduction for a foul, it doesn't mean anything. Nor does any of the criteria in rule 3.

AntonS wrote:

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:
It makes no difference to the outcome of the fight whether the round is written up as 9-9 or 10-10 after the point has been deducted.

Yes is does and you know It does the 70 year old Mr Minn scored round 7 10-9 Mundine as did the second judge who scored a draw after 10 he had round 7 10-9 Mundine then both these judge's took the 1 point off Green that then made their round 7 score 10-8 Mundine the other bloke who ended up with a win for Green after 10 96-94 had round 7 10-10 even and from what I watched Mundine won round 7 so I then take the point deduction that round is also 10-8 Mundine so instead of a 96-94 after 10 Mr Amnesia final score should have read 94-94 so at the very best for Team Green it should have been a draw as for the ref and the 5 minute rest that's the corners fault not just the ref by the way does anyone know who picked the ref and the three judge's

Good question. Judge Ferrauto is South Oz boxing & kickboxing judge/referee. My understating, unless "world title" overseas appointees are disallowed in every State.

What is your view on the effect of changing a round on a scorecard from 9-9 to 10-10?

Perhaps you can explain how that can possibly change the final verdict on that judges card - that is who he has winning, losing or drawing the fight?

I'm no mathematician, but I'm calling bull5hit on that one. All it means is bigger totals at the bottom of the card but the verdict remains unchanged and the number of points between the fighters remains unchanged as well.