BoxRec

skanksta wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 11:58 This does deserve it's own thread - thanks,

I'd like to further muddy the waters...
Is there a difference between...

1) rounds where boxer A wins the round (10-9) but then gets knocked down, and
2) A round where boxer A wins but gets deducted a point ?

Can we therefore have both 10-10 and 9-9 being correct under the different circs ?

DrDuke wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 11:57 I didn't follow that particular discussion, but I personally find the biggest problem of British scorecards in Eddie Hearn, whose fighters, especially Joshua, often get obvious judges' help.

keirw wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 13:37 I was under the impression that the winner of a round must get 10 regardless and any drawn rounds scored 10-10 regardless.

So in theory, if a fighter knocks down his opponent, wins the round clealy but then gets dropped at the end of the round he should win 10-9 rather than 9-8 like most would assume.

Petu v.d. Pajm wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 15:30

keirw wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 13:37 I was under the impression that the winner of a round must get 10 regardless and any drawn rounds scored 10-10 regardless.

So in theory, if a fighter knocks down his opponent, wins the round clealy but then gets dropped at the end of the round he should win 10-9 rather than 9-8 like most would assume.

This is correct as far as no point deductions have come to a play.

However, those penalized points are only accounted after actually scoring the round so in a case where winner of the round is deducted a point for infringement, it would actually look like :

10(-1) - 9

which of course adds up as 9-9 (although it is not marked in judge's papers as 9-9, but instead 10-9 with -1 of a point deduction marked on side of the actual scoring).

MarkMcBurney wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 05:51

Petu v.d. Pajm wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 15:30

keirw wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 13:37 I was under the impression that the winner of a round must get 10 regardless and any drawn rounds scored 10-10 regardless.

So in theory, if a fighter knocks down his opponent, wins the round clealy but then gets dropped at the end of the round he should win 10-9 rather than 9-8 like most would assume.

This is correct as far as no point deductions have come to a play.

However, those penalized points are only accounted after actually scoring the round so in a case where winner of the round is deducted a point for infringement, it would actually look like :

10(-1) - 9

which of course adds up as 9-9 (although it is not marked in judge's papers as 9-9, but instead 10-9 with -1 of a point deduction marked on side of the actual scoring).

If a fighter wins a round but gets knocked down; the ten point must system dictates that the round should be scored 10-10.

olij999 wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 06:33 A good example, although it was under IBF rules rather than BBBofC, was McAuley v Blanco 1 where one judge scored 115-110 for McAuley despite McAuley having been floored 4 times. That was because McAuley had the ability to get floored by a single punch (often quite heavily) but get up and be back behind his jab winning the exchanges within seconds, so I believe at least one round in which he was knocked down was scored 10-10.

Petu v.d. Pajm wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 15:30

keirw wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 13:37 I was under the impression that the winner of a round must get 10 regardless and any drawn rounds scored 10-10 regardless.

So in theory, if a fighter knocks down his opponent, wins the round clealy but then gets dropped at the end of the round he should win 10-9 rather than 9-8 like most would assume.

This is correct as far as no point deductions have come to a play.

However, those penalized points are only accounted after actually scoring the round so in a case where winner of the round is deducted a point for infringement, it would actually look like :

10(-1) - 9

which of course adds up as 9-9 (although it is not marked in judge's papers as 9-9, but instead 10-9 with -1 of a point deduction marked on side of the actual scoring).

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 07:07 Some scored Round 5 of Joshua vs. Wlad as a 10-9 for AJ rather than 10-8.

Apart from the knockdown, Wlad ended up controlling the round.

MarkMcBurney wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 11:57

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 07:07 Some scored Round 5 of Joshua vs. Wlad as a 10-9 for AJ rather than 10-8.

Apart from the knockdown, Wlad ended up controlling the round.

10-10. Wlad quite clearly won the round.

Petu v.d. Pajm wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 12:33

MarkMcBurney wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 11:57

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 07:07 Some scored Round 5 of Joshua vs. Wlad as a 10-9 for AJ rather than 10-8.

Apart from the knockdown, Wlad ended up controlling the round.

10-10. Wlad quite clearly won the round.

You may have thought (and British recommendations for judges also suggest) that it was 10-10 round.

However, in real life two judges had it standard 10-8 for Joshua while the 3rd (Don Trella) scored it 10-9 for Joshua.

One can see master scorecard here : http://static.boxrec.com/f/f5/Show-743831_scores.jpeg

olij999 wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 06:33 For this thread to be worthwhile, people need to state actual sources. Otherwise it will just become a load of conjecture about what people have heard / what they think.

Also, this thread is about British rules, not other countries or commissions. The position in Britain is set out in the Referees Guide (last version 2014). If a fighter would have won a round 10-9 but for a knockdown, that round will be scored 10-10. In British rules, a knockdown is a one-point adjustment - there is no consideration of the severity of the knockdown. What are often relevant, though, are the punches landed immediately before or after the knockdown, e.g. if a fighter goes down after say 10 big punches are landed, or takes a lot of punishment immediately after he gets up and the fight continues. That would be relevant to determining who had won the round anyway before then taking into account the one point for the knockdown.

A good example, although it was under IBF rules rather than BBBofC, was McAuley v Blanco 1 where one judge scored 115-110 for McAuley despite McAuley having been floored 4 times. That was because McAuley had the ability to get floored by a single punch (often quite heavily) but get up and be back behind his jab winning the exchanges within seconds, so I believe at least one round in which he was knocked down was scored 10-10.

prewarboxing wrote: ↑11 Oct 2018, 18:17

olij999 wrote: ↑09 Oct 2018, 06:33 For this thread to be worthwhile, people need to state actual sources. Otherwise it will just become a load of conjecture about what people have heard / what they think.

Also, this thread is about British rules, not other countries or commissions. The position in Britain is set out in the Referees Guide (last version 2014). If a fighter would have won a round 10-9 but for a knockdown, that round will be scored 10-10. In British rules, a knockdown is a one-point adjustment - there is no consideration of the severity of the knockdown. What are often relevant, though, are the punches landed immediately before or after the knockdown, e.g. if a fighter goes down after say 10 big punches are landed, or takes a lot of punishment immediately after he gets up and the fight continues. That would be relevant to determining who had won the round anyway before then taking into account the one point for the knockdown.

A good example, although it was under IBF rules rather than BBBofC, was McAuley v Blanco 1 where one judge scored 115-110 for McAuley despite McAuley having been floored 4 times. That was because McAuley had the ability to get floored by a single punch (often quite heavily) but get up and be back behind his jab winning the exchanges within seconds, so I believe at least one round in which he was knocked down was scored 10-10.

Olij999. I stand completely corrected. My query originally related to the scoring of a round if it is WON by boxer A but the same boxer also had a point deducted. You are quite right in saying that the referees scorecard shows boxer A winning the round 10-9 in the scoring column but with -1 showing in the margin. That point is then deducted from the final score of boxer A when the points are totalled at the end of the contest, thereby effectively making the round 9-9. Thanks for putting me right on this.

Miles

astradamus wrote: ↑12 Oct 2018, 11:03

DrDuke wrote: ↑08 Oct 2018, 11:57 I didn't follow that particular discussion, but I personally find the biggest problem of British scorecards in Eddie Hearn, whose fighters, especially Joshua, often get obvious judges' help.

Have you ever seen Kovalev vs Ward? Ever seen GGG vs Canelo? Actually both matches several times, all refs, all scorecards. What on earth did Eddie do wrong? I come up with similar numbers as the judges have when I watch AJ's fights.