Page 1 of 1
For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 11:16
by gilgamesh
I thought this was a good idea.
You know how in MMA it specifies the method of KO
For instance KO (Head Kick), KO (Punches)...or whatever
I think it might be a good idea to have something to specify why a fight was stopped in Boxing.
For instance
TKO (SOC) = Stopped on Cuts
KO (CW) = Count Waived...this is for an instance when the dude is clearly out of it, but the ref just waived it so he could get a Doc in there to check on the guy
TKO (SIC) = Stopped in Corner
TKO (SOF) = Stopped on Feet
And of course just plain 'ol KO for the 10 count KO's.
Seems like it'd be a good idea don't ya think?
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 11:30
by SenorPipino
Sounds like a great idea.
But I'm sure that the powers that be in boxing would find a reason why it can't be done.
Actually many fighters would probably hate the idea. With obscure fights, a lot of guys probably claim they were stopped on cuts ( caused by a head butt, natch) when in reality the bout was halted because they were taking a pounding.
If the accurate and fully detailed reason the fight was stopped was entered into the record, a lot of boxers wouldn't be able to claim they were jobbed.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 12:43
by Tony1244
Sometimes it can be a bit of both. Stopped in corner because of cut for instance.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 12:48
by gilgamesh
Tony1244 wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 12:43
Sometimes it can be a bit of both. Stopped in corner because of cut for instance.
That'd be a case of Stopped on a Cut as far as I'm concerned.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 13:00
by Tony1244
gilgamesh wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 12:48
Tony1244 wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 12:43
Sometimes it can be a bit of both. Stopped in corner because of cut for instance.
That'd be a case of Stopped on a Cut as far as I'm concerned.
On one hand I think it's a good idea. Light hitting Roy "Cookie" Wallace stopped Scott LeDoux in 2 on cuts. If you just read TKO, you're like WTF.
On the other hand, if he's taking a beating and there's a cut it could be a bit of both. But if a fighter retires after the 5th round I've seen TKO 5 or TKO 6 printed on different publications for the same fight.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 13:01
by DrDuke
It sounds backhanded. Probably some stuff doesn't need to be abbreviated. If it was a stoppage on cuts, write TKO (cuts). Actually it's pointed out in that way sometimes. And what about "Stopped in Corner"? It's RTD, which we actually have, isn't it? And I don't find a clarification about a count being waived too necessary. This idea needs modifications.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 13:08
by gilgamesh
DrDuke wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 13:01
It sounds backhanded. Probably some stuff doesn't need to be abbreviated. If it was a stoppage on cuts, write TKO (cuts). Actually it's pointed out in that way sometimes. And what about "Stopped in Corner"? It's RTD, which we actually have, isn't it? And I don't find a clarification about a count being waived too necessary. This idea needs modifications.
So Modify it Doc. I'm open to suggestions.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 13:31
by DrDuke
gilgamesh wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 13:08
DrDuke wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 13:01
It sounds backhanded. Probably some stuff doesn't need to be abbreviated. If it was a stoppage on cuts, write TKO (cuts). Actually it's pointed out in that way sometimes. And what about "Stopped in Corner"? It's RTD, which we actually have, isn't it? And I don't find a clarification about a count being waived too necessary. This idea needs modifications.
So Modify it Doc. I'm open to suggestions.
Well, my ideas are somehow generally leaning towards the usage of genuine explanations instead of abbrevations. Honestly, I don't like them very much myself, but here they are:
Counted out - KO
Stopped by the ref despite beating the count - TKO
Stopped on feet - TKO (standing)
Stopped on cuts - TKO (cuts)
Stopped on other injury (surrendering without checking by a doctor) - TKO (injury)
Stopped in the corner by a doctor on any injury except cuts - TKO (doc)
Stopped in the corner by a team - RTD
Stopped after throwing in a towel during the fight - RTD (towel)
Stopped without being counted out - KTFO (uhm, a joke, actually I don't see a need in that, as I mentioned)
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 13:34
by gilgamesh
DrDuke wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 13:31
gilgamesh wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 13:08
DrDuke wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 13:01
It sounds backhanded. Probably some stuff doesn't need to be abbreviated. If it was a stoppage on cuts, write TKO (cuts). Actually it's pointed out in that way sometimes. And what about "Stopped in Corner"? It's RTD, which we actually have, isn't it? And I don't find a clarification about a count being waived too necessary. This idea needs modifications.
So Modify it Doc. I'm open to suggestions.
Well, my ideas are somehow generally leaning towards the usage of genuine explanations instead of abbrevations. Honestly, I don't like them very much myself, but here they are:
Counted out - KO
Stopped by the ref despite beating the count - TKO
Stopped on feet - TKO (standing)
Stopped on cuts - TKO (cuts)
Stopped on other injury (surrendering without checking by a doctor) - TKO (injury)
Stopped in the corner by a doctor on any injury except cuts - TKO (doc)
Stopped in the corner by a team - RTD
Stopped after throwing in a towel during the fight - RTD (towel)
Stopped without being counted out - KTFO (uhm, a joke, actually I don't see a need in that, as I mentioned)
I'd have no issue with that
My main point is I'd just like to see more clarity in HOW a KO was achieved on records. Probably wouldn't matter to a lot of people, but I think the hardcore fans would appreciate it.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 15:47
by Boxerbeetle
KTFO should definitely be incorporated into official results going forward
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 18:03
by tiny_acres
Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 15:47
KTFO should definitely be incorporated into official results going forward
like damn is he dead?
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 18:07
by oogiebe
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 18:08
by oogiebe
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 18:09
by gilgamesh
Doesn't really happen much with KO's or TKO's, but I have seen terrible stoppages.
I think you're going a bit far adding that in there though.
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 17 May 2018, 18:11
by oogiebe
gilgamesh wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 18:09
Doesn't really happen much with KO's or TKO's, but I have seen terrible stoppages.
I think you're going a bit far adding that in there though.
Yes...yes I was...
Re: For the sake of clarity
Posted: 18 May 2018, 03:09
by Heretic
This is a good idea.
We should definitely have TKO (Eng) for the English stoppages.
And TKO (nut) For those done by Ward.
In reality I would like it if there were ones for cuts and injuries. I don't see the need for no count KO. In many of those the ref could count to 100 and the guy would still be down. KO is a KO with count or not.
