giving 10-8 rounds without a knockdown/point deduction

[Tom Cruise]

Can someone please explain to me the rules on this and the reasoning for it? I understand the concept but am just wondering if there are specific things we should be looking out for

Personally i don't like them. If you stay on your feet in the face of an onslaught you deserve to keep the extra point Imo. Equally if you fail to knock a guy down when he is hurt then you shouldn't be awarded the extra point. Just my opinion but i want my scoring to reflect the rules as closely as possible...

[ThePunchingBag]

10-10 is an even round.
10-9 is for a clear winner.
10-8 is for a KD or in very rare cases a poor showing from one fighter.
10-7 can only be ruled if a fighter gets KD twice in the round.
9-9 is for when both fighters are KD in the same round.
9-8 is for when a fighter gets KD'd and then KD's the opponent twice in the round.
9-7 I've never heard of a judge giving this score. Rarely occurs if at all.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Can someone please explain to me the rules on this and the reasoning for it? I understand the concept but am just wondering if there are specific things we should be looking out for

Personally i don't like them. If you stay on your feet in the face of an onslaught you deserve to keep the extra point Imo. Equally if you fail to knock a guy down when he is hurt then you shouldn't be awarded the extra point. Just my opinion but i want my scoring to reflect the rules as closely as possible...

So someone who suffers a flash KD should get a 10-8 round but someone who gets beaten to a pulp ie Bradley in the first round vs Ruslan should keep the 10-9? Isn't the whole concept to HURT your opponent?


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[Dr Rumack]

Can someone please explain to me the rules on this and the reasoning for it? I understand the concept but am just wondering if there are specific things we should be looking out for

Personally i don't like them. If you stay on your feet in the face of an onslaught you deserve to keep the extra point Imo. Equally if you fail to knock a guy down when he is hurt then you shouldn't be awarded the extra point. Just my opinion but i want my scoring to reflect the rules as closely as possible...

The only definition I've ever seen for it is the one from the association of boxing commissions that says when a round is "extremely decisive" a 10-8 score can be awarded. That's a pretty weak definition and can be interpreted pretty much whatever way suits the person doing the interpreting.

[Tom Cruise]

10-10 is an even round.
10-9 is for a clear winner.
10-8 is for a KD or in very rare cases a poor showing from one fighter.
10-7 can only be ruled if a fighter gets KD twice in the round.
9-9 is for when both fighters are KD in the same round.
9-8 is for when a fighter gets KD'd and then KD's the opponent twice in the round.
9-7 I've never heard of a judge giving this score. Rarely occurs if at all.

The bolded is what i'm asking about. Is it subjective or is it clear what needs to happen to give a 10-8 round with no kd or point deduction

[marvelousmatt]

So someone who suffers a flash KD should get a 10-8 round but someone who gets beaten to a pulp ie Bradley in the first round vs Ruslan should keep the 10-9? Isn't the whole concept to HURT your opponent?


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Any time a fighter is losing a round and goes down ,it's a 10-8 round.
.

Anytime that a fighter is clearly losing a round and a judge determines,not the ref, that a fighter was held up by the ropes,it is a 10-8 round. Anytime a judge determines that a fighter was losing a round and was "out on his feet" then he can rule it a 10-8 round.

OBV Ruslan should have received a 10-8 second round. The first is iffy as the ref did not count the KD. It clearly was a KD. Bradley was shaken up badly trying to get up but it did not meet criteria above.

[-PBP-]

I think the rule book says "dominant round". To be a dominant round is one where one guy is landing all the punches and the other guy does nothing significant during the entire 3 minutes.

[ThePunchingBag]

The bolded is what i'm asking about. Is it subjective or is it clear what needs to happen to give a 10-8 round with no kd or point deduction

Judges have given 10-8 scores for rounds in which another fighter has dominated an opponent that offered little in terms of retaliation.

As far as I know this is completely up to the judges discretion.

[#1Assassin]

to drop your opponent is a big statement, thats why you automatically get an extra point.

however you can make an equally big statement over the course of 3 minutes without putting your opponent down, at that point a 10-8 round is in order even if there isnt a KD.

the scoring is obviously to decide who the better man is, if you completely dominate a round it warrants an extra point, KD or not.

it should only be on occasion though, when there is a really one sided round. cant stand it when ppl throw out 10-8 rounds like its nothing.

[Tom Cruise]

So someone who suffers a flash KD should get a 10-8 round but someone who gets beaten to a pulp ie Bradley in the first round vs Ruslan should keep the 10-9? Isn't the whole concept to HURT your opponent?

Someone who suffers a flash kd does so because they have poor balance or they got hit with a good shot. Bradley in round 2 (i believe r1 should have been a kd) was hit with great shots but stayed on his feet. Same with khan vs maidana. Neither provodnikov or maidana were able to put their guy over, and neither khan or Bradley were hurt enough to go down. Imo they should be 10-9 rounds.

The only definition I've ever seen for it is the one from the association of boxing commissions that says when a round is "extremely decisive" a 10-8 score can be awarded. That's a pretty weak definition and can be interpreted pretty much whatever way suits the person doing the interpreting.

Thanks this is what i was after.