Can you score a round with a knockdown 10-9? 10-10? What is the deal?

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

I always view a KD as an automatic 1 point deduction. So if the guy who was knocked down goes on and wins the round I score it 9-9, if he loses the round I score it 10-8. If he’s knocked down twice 10-7 and so on.

[M Bison]

I was always under the impression it is an automatic 10-8 round. Then with every extra knockdown it goes 10-7, 10-6 etc. But apprently that is not strictly the case in any rulebook.

One of the judge's for the first Marquez - Pacquiao fight scored the first round (in which Marquez was knocked down 3 times) 10-7 instead of 10-6 as would have made sense according to this way of thinking. His arguement was that Marquez won the round besides the three KDs, so he only took 3 points instead of 4... seriously that is his explanation.

Are there any examples of this happening in rounds with one knockdown? Would you be okay with a 10-8 round being scored 10-9, if the boxer who was KD won the rest of the round? Think Fury vs. Wilder, were Fury got caught with lucky punches and otherwise dominated the round, on both occasions.

What I would like to know is, if a round is completely and utterly dominated by one guy but he gets dropped by a shot near the end of a round would it still be 10-8? I mean we all know you can fight back and turn a round back on its head after being knocked-down if you're dominant, but surely its unfair to ignore all the action that proceeded before that knock-down.

[NearHypnos]

I remember loving Letterman scoring the Ortiz/Maidana round 10-10 where they both knocked each other down. Sure; unofficial but it seemed fair. There was no loser or winner in that round and all things seemed equal.

P will and Martinez 1 in the first round os arguably a 10-9 round cor Martinez despite both having knockdowns. Could go 9-9 or 10-9 in either favor.

I think 10-7 is the norm for multiple knockdowns and I don’t disagree. Sure, it should likely and technically be 1+1+1+the round but I don’t particularly like the idea of 10-6. It’s like an unwritten rule i guess that the first knockdown gets you the point but NOT the round yet (not technically) and the second knockdown gets you the point and barring insane circumstances, gets you the round point and seals the round. You can get a 10-8 round without a knockdown so past 10-7 starts getting to ridiculous for my liking. To me if it can be worse than 10-6, it’s already been stopped.

[FrankieClutch]

You can't score it 10-10 but if the fighter who was knocked down won the rd. , then you can score it 9-9.

Came to say this. A knockdown means the guy who got knocked down loses a point. If he comes back in that round to win it (which is usually not the case), it would be a 9-9 round.

[4truth]

Logic tells me 9-9, the term 10 point must tells me 10-10. I've been down this road before and I still don't know.

[Boxing Goat]

Came to say this. A knockdown means the guy who got knocked down loses a point. If he comes back in that round to win it (which is usually not the case), it would be a 9-9 round.

Correctamundo

[Boxing Goat]

Logic tells me 9-9, the term 10 point must tells me 10-10. I've been down this road before and I still don't know.

If it's a ten point must system and there was a KD, the best the fighter being knocked down can do is a 10-9 round which to me is not really all that fair.

That said, most of the time when a fighter is legitimately knocked down, they rarely did enough before or come back to win the round.

[BoxingIsGreat]

A lot of Judges in the past (probably present too) won't go below 10-7 because it doesn't give the fighter a chance to come back on the cards. I'm not a big fan of that.

It doesn't get scored 10-9 if there is a knockdown and you think the fighter who got knocked down won the round. It would be scored 9-9. Understand? 10 for the fighter who won the round (minus the 1 point knockdown). Remember, 10 point must system, then adjust the scores from there.

Good post. Green K.
That's the way I see it too.

[BoxingIsGreat]

I also score the first round 9-9 if neither fighter did anything. Not many meaningful punches landed and no display of defensive skills. It happens a lot. It's too boring to watch. I deduct 1 point.

I know it's not done that way but that's how I would do it if I was scoring. Maybe give the fighters more motivation to fight.

[Lomadeaux]

I think it's possible, but very rare, for there to be a legit example where it would make sense. The Pacquiao vs Marquez example is not one of those legitimate situations in my opinion.

I think that if fighter A knocks down fighter B, but it's a flash knockdown, but fighter B was winning the round and comes back to dominate, even hurting, fighter A in the same round, I think scoring the round 10-9 or even 10-10 (depending the extent of the domination) makes sense. But normally a knockdown gets you an extra point, and that should not be messed with too much.

No... guys I just explained to you how it works. It's a 10 point must system. This is how it works.

Fighter A is dominating a round, gets cracked by Figher B and gets up real quick and isn't hurt.

The Round is scored 9-9. Figher A gets a 10 and figher B gets a 9. Fighter A got a point deducted for being knocked down.

It's a 9-9 round. Get it?