Tweet
No, it a good way to spot casual fans who try and pass of being knowledgable about the sport from what they read on Boxrec
-
-
No. Most TKOs are just the ref stopping the fight before the fighter has time to finish him off and clearly would have finished him off like Kovalev-Pascal. They stop fights so early now that the only way to get a straight KO is a one punch KO. If you beat a man bad enough that the ref had to rescue him then you deserve a KO win. I consider KOs and TKOs as the same thing unless the TKO was about a cut. Robinson scored a TKO over La Motta because the ref stopped the fight with La Motta still on his feet. The ref didn't want La Mootta to be killed.Comment
-
I totally agreed.Originally posted by bigdlb12
Pavlik vs Taylor 1 is a perfect example... people hardly remember that it was a TKO, not a KO
Posted from Boxingscene.com App for AndroidComment
-
i agree. it shows who really has 1 punch ko power.
floyds ortiz KO should be written with an * as well.Comment
-
Like others have said before me, KO and TKO are the same thing. If you want to say KTFO, I guess you could make that distinction although most television networks and the FCC would censor your obscenities for the record.Comment
-
TKO
KO
KTFO
How's that
Comment
-
They already are separate on boxrec. Do we really need to have announcers and stuff going "20 wins, 6 by knockout, 14 by technical knockout" or what? If a fan is dumb enough to think all knockouts are unconscious people, that's their problem.Comment
-
why not take it a step further also indicating clear cut decisions and bullsheet decisions. But who would decide what's what?
then we could do on stool retirements and fights stopped due to swelling and then stopped due to cuts, fights stopped due to a guy just quiting, etc.
either you finish the fight or you don't and it shows on the record as a ko. been good for 100+ years and will be fine well in to the future.
so no, they don't need to be separated, there's no need.Comment
Comment