Should KO's and TKO's be seperated on a fighters record?

[Deevel916]

I think so. Say you have a fighter who is 20-0 w/ 20ko's. Automatically the average casual fan would assume that he knocked 20 opponents out COLD when in reality many of those "ko's could have been tko's where the ref stopped it. In reality that's not really a KO.

They should classify KO's where the opponent was dropped and couldn't make the count or was just flat out knocked out cold, and TKO's where the ref put a hault to the fight as a result of a fighter taking too much damage.

Your thoughts.....

[vorgaphe]

Maybe they should just be referred to as stoppages?

[SalimShady1212]

No, both are stoppages

[Bull24]

Questionable stoppages should have an Asterisk by them. Like "tko8*"

[heatman]

I think a stoppage is a stoppage

No point splitting hairs

Keep the current system

[Deevel916]

I think a stoppage is a stoppage

No point splitting hairs

Keep the current system

Then call it stoppages rather than knockouts.

[mrlopez]

If thats the case, might as well add how many clinches/holds a fighter has. I mosdef wouldnt want to see a fighter who has a lot

[-PBP-]

No because it takes power to win by stoppage either way. Maybe if you separate TKOs from cuts and injuries from actual stoppages caused by punches or an accumulation of punches.

[#1Assassin]

not only is it unnecessary but it doesnt accomplish what you want anyways.

you say they should be seperated so you can tell if a fighter is a lights out puncher or not. but a good portion of TKOs would have been KOs if the ref just let it go a bit longer or vice versa had he decided to stop it. its a matter of circumstance.

either way the point is how many guys did he get out of there, how exactly doesnt matter that much once its over with. no need to drag out the introductions further, the very notion is ridiculous imo.

[Deevel916]

No because it takes power to win by stoppage either way. Maybe if you separate TKOs from cuts and injuries from actual stoppages caused by punches or an accumulation of punches.

All fine and dandy if it was classified as stoppages rather than KO's.

Is Pacquiaos KO of Hatton the same as his stoppage of Oscar? No but both are classified as knockouts when in reality only 1 of them were actually knocked out.