giving 10-8 rounds without a knockdown/point deduction

[The Big Dunn]

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.



Thanks this is what i was after.

I agree with yourscoring rds for the fights above. WHen Floyd fought shane I gave shane a 10-8 rd even though floyd never left his feet. If you totally dominate all aspects of a round likr shane did and land two or three devastating blows I think you should be rewarded.

[bojangles1987]

I don't give 10-8 rounds without a KD. If you were to, it would have to be a situation where a fighter is out on their feet and doing nothing in return for nearly an entire round. Or something like the Broner-DeMarco round where Broner landed 40 something punches and DeMarco landed like 5.

[White_Knight]

I heard Harold Lederman say a 10-8 round can only be given without a knock down if the fighter that loses doesn't throw punches back or put up any sort of a fight. I don't know if this is written in the rulebook or is simply Lederman's own take.

[.:: JSFD26 ::.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1PunchKOPOW!

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.

That's my thing, whether it was scored a KD or a push Bradley was still out on his feet for 2 rounds they should've been scored 10-8 rounds but my guess is judge's are getting away from that type of scoring as well as 10-10 rounds.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[boliodogs]

The judges today are fifferent from the judges of 15 years ago. Even rounds were often given. It was rare when there were no even rounds in a ten round fight and some fights would have judges calling 2 or 3 rounds even. Now even rounds are almost never given. A 10-8 round with no knockdown was often given in the past. If the round was dominated by one fighter and he landed lots of big punches he was rewarded with a 10-8 round. I have not seen a no knockdown round scored 10-8 in a long time. I like the scoring of fights better in the old days. Scoring a very onesided no knockdown round 10-8 and calling a round that really was even an even round were useful tools judges had to score a fight fairly and accurately. For some reason I don't know about these tools have been taken away from today's judges. In the old days the Russian would have been given at least one and maybe more than one 10-8 no knockdown rounds in his fight with Bradley.

[DLT]

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...

I totally disagree. If you can stop a fight with a guy on his feet then you should definitely be able to get a 10-8 round. The person not going down may be the worst thing. Its like sometimes guys take knees on purpose. Cotto was taking knees against Margartio because he was actually getting hurt more by having to fight him on his feet.

[DLT]

I agree with yourscoring rds for the fights above. WHen Floyd fought shane I gave shane a 10-8 rd even though floyd never left his feet. If you totally dominate all aspects of a round likr shane did and land two or three devastating blows I think you should be rewarded.

there was no way that was a 10-8 round. He didnt even land anything but like 2 or 3 meaningful punches. Now they were big punches but Floyd responded back to all of them. Also, all of Shane's work was only like a total of a minute or a minute & 30.

Floyd won the 1st part of round until the big shot, he swung back during the big shots, and he ended the round landing shots on Shane. Alot of people came away thinking that by the end of the round, Floyd had control of the fight again

[boliodogs]

I heard Harold Lederman say a 10-8 round can only be given without a knock down if the fighter that loses doesn't throw punches back or put up any sort of a fight. I don't know if this is written in the rulebook or is simply Lederman's own take.

That's Lederman's own take. I have seen tons of no knockdown rounds scored 10-8 in which the losing fighter was fighting back hard the whole round but he was not landing his punches and he was getting creamed. That was maybe 10 or 15 years ago. Today Lederman's take is about right. I don't see many 10-8 no knockdown rounds anymore.

[waxfondler]

i think 10-8 rounds are appropriate if a fighter is CLEARLY hurt and is having a hard time recovering.... especially the cases where they are basically a zombie relying on the ropes to stay up & galloping around the ring like a newborn giraffe.

bottom line, if u get put on ***** street bobbling around looking crazy, thats a 10-8 round. LOL

[Fetta]

Flavor of the month on NSB: 10-8 rounds. They will pop up in every fight now