Judges need to score more rounds even, agreed?

[Kid Achilles]

It's a problem in modern boxing when judges feel compelled to score a very close round 10-9. I think it's a load of bull****.

For me a 10-9 round indicates that one fighter demonstrated control over his opponent in one way or another, whether it be by harder, cleaner punching, superior defensive skill, or higher work rate.

When the situation of a closely contested round arises, with no clear winner, why should one fighter win the round by the same margin that he would have if he completely outboxed his opponent and did all but knock him down?

I firmly believe all very close rounds should be scored 10-10. I think a fighter should have to win a round decisively to score a 10-9, not merely land a few more punches than his opponent.

[Kid Achilles]

I'm bumping this to the top. I feel like it's an issue that would divide this forum and create some good debates.

[JMCbulls]

i never thought about that, but its a great point. so many times today u will see one judge go 8-4 rds in favor of fighter A, and theo ther go 8-4 in favor of fighter B. i think if there werem ore even rds, instead of many rds that are all based on opinion, it would cut down on margins like this.

[TyrantT316]

Well I don't think they should just start doing it for the heck of it...I'd rather not have a fight where there are like 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10...10-10 rounds...

but that is hard to call...sometimes you just feel a fighter tried a bit more in a round...sometimes it comes down to one big punch...

tough call

[DiegoFuego]

Even rounds are for people who can't judge fights. It's for the people who look at their scorecard after every single fight and say, huh?! If you score rounds even, thank God you aren't a judge.

[Kid Achilles]

So you think a fighter who lands two more jabs than his opponent should win a round just a decisively as the guy who batters his opponent around the ring and does everything but knock him down? Both should be 10-9 rounds in your mind?