Judging a Fight: Some Ideas

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • ProBox1
    The GodFather
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • Sep 2004
    • 5070
    • 246
    • 6
    • 13,925

    #1

    Judging a Fight: Some Ideas

    Judging a fight is very subjective. The one area in which most boxing pundits and judges appear to agree is the effect of a knockdown upon scoring. It is boxing tradition that if a fighter’s butt hit the canvas, he will lose a round by two points.



    What if a fighter so dominates a round but fails to knock down his opponent down? Does he deserve a 10-8 round? Most judges will award a 10-9, regardless. For most judges, the knockdown is the defining standard. Knock your opponent down and you will get a 10-8.

    When I asked Mike DeLisa of Cyberboxingzone.com, he said, “It all depends. I don't need a knockdown for a 2-point round, nor do I automatically give a 10-8 for a knockdown. I ALWAYS give the round to a fighter who has scored a knockdown by at least 10-9 -- sort of a bright line I can't pass.” Michael DeLisa envisions a scenario in which a fighter wins a round by two points without a knockdown and at least a fighter can never lose a round if he knocks the opponent down.

    Showtime Nick Charles adds, “My opinion of domination is when an opponent can neither fight back (in which the referee can and often should stop the fight) or a knockdown in which the domination is so complete it forces a halt however temporary. The difference to me is that when a boxer can't fight back he's rendered defenseless and the fight is over. That would be a 10-8 only in the round that the fight ended. -E.g. 7.” He added, “I strongly believe a boxer can rally from a knockdown and lose the round 10-9.” [details]
  • Bombardier
    D-Fens Foster
    Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
    • Sep 2004
    • 4264
    • 201
    • 151
    • 11,290

    #2
    Another solution would be to have a round scored a draw unless there is a clear, absolute winner (who would then get a 10-9). If this means that most rounds in a fight are scored a draw, then so be it. Fighters would eventually adjust their styles to go for the big scores, with the added benefit that the fights then are more exciting.

    The problem with the proposed system here is that a mediocre fighter who ekes out a small margin of victory in a round still gets rewarded with a 1-0 score. In my mind you are not winning a fight unless you clearly dominate a round. When two guys trade a few taps then none of them should get the win regardless of who threw more of them.

    Just my opinion. Good article.

    Comment

    • TommyD
      Amateur
      Interim Champion - 1-100 posts
      • Mar 2004
      • 2
      • 3
      • 0
      • 6,020

      #3
      Good points

      I agree with that some rounds should be given a draw. Under the Lotierzo system, if neither fighter do much to win a round then you score the round 0-0. I believe we need to eliminate the idea that a fighter has to win a round.

      Comment

      Working...
      TOP