whats the difference between no decision and no contest?

[handsofstone]

although iv followed boxing for a lot of years i still dont know :??

[Old bones Ian]

Years ago a No-decision was used in bout where both boxers had a pre-fight agreement that if the fight went the distance then it wouldn't go to a points. that it would just be a No-decision, so you did have guys that would have alot more wins or losses on there records. I think some states in the USA wouldn't allow points decisions, due to betting on the fights, alot of people went by 'newspaper' decisions where the newspapers would say who won the fight in their opinion.
nowadays you have very few if any 'no decision' fights.

A No Contest is usually called if a fight ends in unusual circumstances, such as the the recent Chad Dawson v Bernard Hopkins fight, in the 2nd round Hopkins was dropped onto his shoulder in an accidental clash with Dawson, and Hopkins wasn't able to continue.

[handsofstone]

g

Years ago a No-decision was used in bout where both boxers had a pre-fight agreement that if the fight went the distance then it wouldn't go to a points. that it would just be a No-decision, so you did have guys that would have alot more wins or losses on there records. I think some states in the USA wouldn't allow points decisions, due to betting on the fights, alot of people went by 'newspaper' decisions where the newspapers would say who won the fight in their opinion.
nowadays you have very few if any 'no decision' fights.

A No Contest is usually called if a fight ends in unusual circumstances, such as the the recent Chad Dawson v Bernard Hopkins fight, in the 2nd round Hopkins was dropped onto his shoulder in an accidental clash with Dawson, and Hopkins wasn't able to continue.

yeah well that was the fight i was thinking about because after the WBC overruled the TKO for Dawson it was changed from a no-dec to a no con(or was it vice-versa) i was just wondering why they bothered to change it ,whats the difference in the outcome?