Should we have 10-10 scoring?

[punch13]

Should we have 10-10 scoring for rounds that are too close to call? It doesn't make sense to score a round 10-9 for one fighter if they basically threw the same number of punches with the same amount of power and if there are no knockdowns or penalties. It gives that fighter a 1 point advantage (with a 2-way point swing advantage since the 1 point could have been awarded to the other fighter) which could (and often does) make a difference in the fight. The other fighter has to make up a 1 point disadvantage, and even if he pummels the first fighter in the next round with no knockdowns, he would only receive a 10-9 round; sometimes they'll award a 10-8 round, but rarely. To me this unfair, the first fighter was given a 1 point gift, and the other fighter fought hard and won clearly in the next round just to get back that 1 point. These points do not reflect the accuracy of the fight.

With 10-10 scoring, only rounds that are clearly won will receive 10-9 scores. If there are knockdowns or penalties, then further deductions are made. But this gives a more fair and accurate depiction of the fight. It's hard to score boxing to begin with, we could at least create a scoring system that tries to accurately measure who is winning and losing.

I understand that this may lead to more draws, but at least it's fair, and I can live with a draw better than a unfair judgement. When a boxer loses, it's hard to recover psychologically from it especially since they normally have anywhere from 2 months to 6 months to a whole year between fights. That's a long time to live with your last fight which was a loss, and perhaps an unfair loss, but nonethless a loss in the boxer's mind.

[McGrain]

I agree.

If I can't split them, I won't split them.

[Amsterdam]

Yes sir, and I use 10-10 on my own scorecards if the round is basically even, I feel I'm pretty proficient on scoring a fight, I use the standard criteria and score bouts unbaised.

Also, the 10-8 should be used more liberally for rounds that just brutal dominations, but no KD's, often they aren't.

Take Mijares-Arce type rounds and just about every round of Mayweather-Gatti for example. When one guy landed very little and got stunned and thrown around the ring brutally, ought to be an automatic 10-8.

It'd help these disgusting ass scorecards.

[thewoo]

I would love to see more 10-10 rounds. It's the fighters job to win a round if he doesn't win it he shouldn't get credit for it.

[Smazz20]

Yeah, but as you said, boxing is VERY hard to score to begin with and even using this method leaves plenty of room for corruption.

[joekirkbycobra]

Yes sir, and I use 10-10 on my own scorecards if the round is basically even, I feel I'm pretty proficient on scoring a fight, I use the standard criteria and score bouts unbaised.

Also, the 10-8 should be used more liberally for rounds that just brutal dominations, but no KD's, often they aren't.

Take Mijares-Arce type rounds and just about every round of Mayweather-Gatti for example. When one guy landed very little and got stunned and thrown around the ring brutally, ought to be an automatic 10-8.

It'd help these disgusting ass scorecards.2right

[booradley]

I score some rounds 10-10. I'd like to see more judges score more rounds 10-10. This is especially important in the early rounds of a lot of fights. I also notice fighters stealing rounds by winning the last 60 seconds when they didn't do shit for the first 2 minutes. Those rounds should also be 10-10 rounds. More liberal use of 10-8 scoring would also be justified. You don't have to knock a guy down to thoroughly kick his ass! Furthermore, not every knockdown justifies a 10-8 round. Personally I think judges should be sequestered in a sound proof room, and watch the fights on a series of large monitors with no audio.

Boo

[africandawg]

Yeah, but as you said, boxing is VERY hard to score to begin with and even using this method leaves plenty of room for corruption.


Sorry corruption like how--I'm dumb.----I'm all for 10/10 because of the inconsistent interpretations of how different judges read a round.:smoke

[africandawg]

To award the 10/10 on a close round is so much fairer----when you look at a sequence of punches thrown at correct camera speed & then see that same sequence in slowmo, ''at times'' its amazing the difference of what you thought was clean and what actually connected--especially in the lower weights..:smoke

[Smazz20]

Sorry corruption like how--I'm dumb.----I'm all for 10/10 because of the inconsistent interpretations of how different judges read a round.:smoke

Because a fighter that SHOULD lose a round, might be awarded a 10-10 round due to being the hometown fighter. Whereas in the current model the judges would have to award the one fighter the round. If the fighter that earned the round gets it, fair enough, but if it goes to hometown fighter then it's gonna look blatantly corrupt. Not that that's ever stopped anything.:-(

With the 10-10 version, then it won't look as bad, but it could still do every bit as much damage.

[eborted_l]

yes but remember this pussy in the brawl in mtl judge: Angelo Poletti 148-147 10 rounds even fuck off

[truewarrior]

Yes sir, and I use 10-10 on my own scorecards if the round is basically even, I feel I'm pretty proficient on scoring a fight, I use the standard criteria and score bouts unbaised.

Also, the 10-8 should be used more liberally for rounds that just brutal dominations, but no KD's, often they aren't.

Take Mijares-Arce type rounds and just about every round of Mayweather-Gatti for example. When one guy landed very little and got stunned and thrown around the ring brutally, ought to be an automatic 10-8.

It'd help these disgusting ass scorecards.

I agree bro I think the score system would be alot better with more 10-8 rounds simply because one boxer like you said mijares can completely dominate a round but because he has solid but not above average power does not knock the other guy down. IMO I would totally give someone the 10-8 if they outworked and outboxed his opponent.

[africandawg]

Because a fighter that SHOULD lose a round, might be awarded a 10-10 round due to being the hometown fighter. Whereas in the current model the judges would have to award the one fighter the round. If the fighter that earned the round gets it, fair enough, but if it goes to hometown fighter then it's gonna look blatantly corrupt. Not that that's ever stopped anything.:-(

With the 10-10 version, then it won't look as bad, but it could still do every bit as much damage.


Thanks I get the picture----MAN what a conniving devious lot we are!!!:smoke

[Square Pants]

I use 10-10 on my home cards, but its very rare that I do, and I think official judges should follow that lead. Usually in a round that is leaning towards too close to call, I go with either the guy who landed the harder shot(s) OR if they landed similar punches, then I go with the guy who pressed more. If I cant give the round to a guy still, then I go 10-10 and move on.

[Wige247]

I think even rounds are cop outs. it's rare that after watching a round, I'm like "I really don't know who won that round/did the most damage/came away better." I see scorecards on here where people throw out 2, 3, 4, 5?!? 10-10 rounds and I'm like you must've fallen asleep or something.

[HauntingTheHoly]

I think even rounds are cop outs. it's rare that after watching a round, I'm like "I really don't know who won that round/did the most damage/came away better." I see scorecards on here where people throw out 2, 3, 4, 5?!? 10-10 rounds and I'm like you must've fallen asleep or something.

I agree that if 10-10 is used, it should be vary rarely. If there is one round almost too close to call, just make a decision. Find something to "slightly" justify one fighter over another. And if there is another similar round later, just give it to the other fighter.

[ChrisPontius]

Yes sir, and I use 10-10 on my own scorecards if the round is basically even, I feel I'm pretty proficient on scoring a fight, I use the standard criteria and score bouts unbaised.

Also, the 10-8 should be used more liberally for rounds that just brutal dominations, but no KD's, often they aren't.

Take Mijares-Arce type rounds and just about every round of Mayweather-Gatti for example. When one guy landed very little and got stunned and thrown around the ring brutally, ought to be an automatic 10-8.

It'd help these disgusting ass scorecards.

I agree, especially about the 10-8 part.

Is that officially allowed? I can't remember seeing it, although Merchant speaks about it and maybe some cases slipped my mind.

[lbarrow]

I love this scoring. if i see a round where its too close to give it to either guy then its 10 each its the fairest way

[Brickhaus]

yes but remember this pussy in the brawl in mtl judge: Angelo Poletti 148-147 10 rounds even fuck off

Hagler-Seales I. 10 round fight. Scores: 99-99, 99-99, 98-96.

Still not sure how the hell that happened. I don't know of anyone who actually saw the fight to say whether that was legit.

[C Money]

I realy try to avoid 10/10 rounds, but occasionally? Sometimes there are even rounds where neither man gets the better. So 10/10 is ok but should be used SPARINGLY. Too many get carried away with what they call even but controversey is nothing new.