Scoring Even Rounds

[Dr Rumack]

The Duran-Leonard talk on various threads got me thinking about one of the major contrasts between that fight and fights that we see nowadays, namely the scoring.

For Duran-Leonard I, the judges scored 19 out of the total of 45 rounds even, with Judge Angelo Poletti turning in what was referred to as a 'monument to indecision' where he scored the fight 3-2-10.

Obviously Poletti's card is an extreme case, but at the other end of the spectrum, you have the Pacquiao-Marquez trilogy.

Pacquiao and Marquez have fought 36 rounds, and despite the trilogy being widely regarded as extremely close, not a single round was scored even.

Obviously the judges are under instruction to act this way, but is this an appropriate way to score fights. In the prevailing scoring system, rounds which are absolute toss-ups end up being scored the same as rounds where one guy clearly dominated.

Should the difference between tow such rounds be acknowledged in the scoring?

[White_Knight]

This is a good question and a complicated matter.

I once thought it would be better to score a round with a knockdown 10-7, a round with a clear winner 10-8, a round with one guy just nicking it 10-9, and one where you just can't decide 10-10. But that may actually make matters worse. Judges would have an even more complicated task.

I personally think judges should score more rounds even. The judges should ask "was there an obvious winner in that round?" If the answer is no, score it even. Because by scoring these extremely close rounds one way or the other you get massive disagreements in the scorecards.

[ИATAS]

great thread.

Not scoring rounds even is why we have so many "robberies" or bad decisions. So many rounds in fights are really hard to score and there is no real clear winner. By forcing yourself to score one of these rounds a clear winner is not accurately scoring the fight!