Vitali lost to Lennox in similar fashion Kell lost to GGG

[Chollo Vista]

Actually, that means the fight is a draw. Show me a fight where two even scorecards didn't result in a majority draw and I'll be forced to agree.

That rule needs to be changed for it makes no sense.

If you have 2 judges that have it even, well, that's what the 3rd judge is there for to be the tie breaker.

If 2 judges have it even and the 3rd judge says Brook won, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Brook won.

That rule needs to be amended

[The Comic DON]

That rule needs to be changed for it makes no sense.

If you have 2 judges that have it even, well, that's what the 3rd judge is there for to be the tie breaker.

If 2 judges have it even and the 3rd judge says Brook won, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Brook won.

That rule needs to be amended

Nice to know that you agree friend, the fight was a draw at the point of the stoppage.

Now if you want to get the rules changed for next time maybe you should start a petition to get the rules changed. And the unlikely hood you get it approved, fights from the past can't be grandfathered in.

[Chollo Vista]

Nice to know that you agree friend, the fight was a draw at the point of the stoppage.

Now if you want to get the rules changed for next time maybe you should start a petition to get the rules changed.

You tell me, all biasedness aside, does that rule make sense?

You have 2 judges calling it a draw; the 3rd judge says Fighter A won. Well, Fighter A should win. That's what the 3rd judge is for.

What am I missing here?

[The Comic DON]

You tell me, all biasedness aside, does that rule make sense?

You have 2 judges calling it a draw; the 3rd judge says Fighter A won. Well, Fighter A should win. That's what the 3rd judge is for.

What am I missing here?

I understand what you're saying but judges are voting on three results: Win, Lose, and Draw.

Two judges cast their vote for a draw, while the others say fighter A won. If you use your method you're basically saying the other two judges opinion didn't matter although the majority though the fight was even.

That's my understanding of why the third scorecard wouldn't be a tie breaker. That rule might change one day but I'm not sure enough fans agree with you to make it happen.

[Champ Wilder]

[Chollo Vista]

I understand what you're saying but judges are voting on three results: Win, Lose, and Draw.

Two judges cast their vote for a draw, while the others say fighter A won. If you use your method you're basically saying the other two judges opinion didn't matter although the majority though the fight was even.

That's my understanding of why the third scorecard wouldn't be a tie breaker. That rule might change one day but I'm not sure enough fans agree with you to make it happen.

If fights were fought to be draws, you'd have a point. But since fights are fought to have winners and the 3rd judge is acting as the tie breaker, then to me the fate of the fight is in the 3rd judges hands.