Re: KO Percentages Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmanhatton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmanhatton
think doing it by the proper definitions of a 'ko' or 'TKO' is the only fair way to record these stoppages
for example hatton and david diaz werent gonna be getting up if there was a 30 second count in their fights against pac,
however take juan diaz against marquez, he may have been able to although all 3 fights were stopped without a count
is it fair for marquez to get the 'KO' ?
Of course it's fair! Watch the fight here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-cw4olewYc
He was done, if they carry on he gets ko'd.
Basically a TKO is no less impressive than a KO anyway, a KO just means knocked out, i.e counted out, a TKO just means the referee stopped the fight because the fighter was clearly about to be KO'd so he intervened for the fighter's safety.
It's like in chess. Very rarely will see an actual checkmate in grandmaster practice, even at amatuer level because the losing player will resign before the mate is delivered.
Does this mean it's less of a win than a genuine checkmate? Of course not, the checkmate was inevitable so they stopped the game early to avoid having to see it played out over the board.
In the Diaz Marquez fight a ko is just as inevitable but it comes also with the health risk to Diaz if its played out so the ref saves him from further punishment.
So it reads TKO, but to all intents and purposes it's a KO, becuase it if carried on Diaz would eventually get hurt so bad he couldn't make the count.
So Marquez deserves the KO, but a TKO is the same thing really,
a knockout is a knockout after all.
i agree, but the question was how many title fights actually end up in a true 'ko'
look up the definition a proper 'ko' is classified by the refree completing a ten count, if it is stopped prior to this, then its a TKO,
and to say marquez should get the KO because diaz was about to ko'd is just an assumption ... have you not seen corrales - castillo 1 ?
why not just call the fight off when corrales goes down so easilly the second time....it seemed obvious that he was about to get knocked but we know how it actually turned out
Well firstly Coralles was not nearly as done as Diaz was. He still had the presence of mind to spit his gumshield out and wasn't flat on his back when the ref stepped in.
Secondly, if my memory serves me right, Castillo only lost that fight because the referee intervened and ruled it a TKO with Castillo still on his feet.
So Coralles didn't knock him out either as imagine how it could have turned out had the ref let them fight on.......just saying.
Diaz was DONE, no coming back for him in that fight.
Re: KO Percentages Question
was it corrales intelligence to spit his gum shield out or simply instinct ... hard to tell, look at how tyson scrambled round on the floor for his wasting most of the ten count against buster douglas... i doubt that just after being knocked down for the second time he was thinking about trying to buy the odd second by spitting the mouth piece out
im pretty sure you will agree then that corrales - castillo shouldnt go down as a 'ko' but a tko, there was no count as the referee intervened
what makes this different than the pac - diaz fight or the pac - hatton fight
in both cases it was game over, there was no coming back
i dont neccesarilly agree with this technicality, and it doesnt affect the fighter in anyway i was simply answering the question in the way i see it
it does work the other way too, look at Benn - Mclellan, ruled as a KO in the record books although he took a knee and allowed himself to be counted out he wasnt brutally put down in the way hatton or david diaz were
Re: KO Percentages Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmanhatton
was it corrales intelligence to spit his gum shield out or simply instinct ... hard to tell, look at how tyson scrambled round on the floor for his wasting most of the ten count against buster douglas... i doubt that just after being knocked down for the second time he was thinking about trying to buy the odd second by spitting the mouth piece out
im pretty sure you will agree then that corrales - castillo shouldnt go down as a 'ko' but a tko, there was no count as the referee intervened
what makes this different than the pac - diaz fight or the pac - hatton fight
in both cases it was game over, there was no coming back
i dont neccesarilly agree with this technicality, and it doesnt affect the fighter in anyway i was simply answering the question in the way i see it
it does work the other way too, look at Benn - Mclellan, ruled as a KO in the record books although he took a knee and allowed himself to be counted out he wasnt brutally put down in the way hatton or david diaz were
Yeah but it seems your implying, or regard a KO as better than a TKO, hence Marquez 'not deserving a ko'.
I'm just saying they are the same thing. There is no greater glory for winning by KO than there is by TKO, in fact if I named 10 recent fights that ended in a stoppage you'd probably be hard pressed to accurately pick which were KO's and which were TKO's, hell I expect even the fighters themselves would often not know.
It's all the same, sure there are bullshit stoppages occasionally and we can argue them, but generally, and in the case of JM Marquez against Diaz, Floyd against Hatton, Mosely against Margarito and Coralles against Castillo, they all knocked their opponent out.
Whether its in the record books as TKO or KO, it is completely the same thing.
Re: KO Percentages Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmanhatton
was it corrales intelligence to spit his gum shield out or simply instinct ... hard to tell, look at how tyson scrambled round on the floor for his wasting most of the ten count against buster douglas... i doubt that just after being knocked down for the second time he was thinking about trying to buy the odd second by spitting the mouth piece out
im pretty sure you will agree then that corrales - castillo shouldnt go down as a 'ko' but a tko, there was no count as the referee intervened
what makes this different than the pac - diaz fight or the pac - hatton fight
in both cases it was game over, there was no coming back
i dont neccesarilly agree with this technicality, and it doesnt affect the fighter in anyway i was simply answering the question in the way i see it
it does work the other way too, look at Benn - Mclellan, ruled as a KO in the record books although he took a knee and allowed himself to be counted out he wasnt brutally put down in the way hatton or david diaz were
Yeah but it seems your implying, or regard a KO as better than a TKO, hence Marquez 'not deserving a ko'.
I'm just saying they are the same thing. There is no greater glory for winning by KO than there is by TKO, in fact if I named 10 recent fights that ended in a stoppage you'd probably be hard pressed to accurately pick which were KO's and which were TKO's, hell I expect even the fighters themselves would often not know.
It's all the same, sure there are bullshit stoppages occasionally and we can argue them, but generally, and in the case of JM Marquez against Diaz, Floyd against Hatton, Mosely against Margarito and Coralles against Castillo, they all knocked their opponent out.
Whether its in the record books as TKO or KO, it is completely the same thing.
ok i agree that deserve is probably the wrong word to use, but should it be listed in the same way.... and i agree a knockout is a knockout unless were talking calzaghe manfredo :-X, but the question regarded facts and figures
Re: KO Percentages Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Youngblood
This question was asked of me on a non-boxing forum, and I completely have no idea. So maybe some of you guys can help or give some insight. I dont even know if these stats are available, but if so cool, if not, give me your opinions and Ill pass them along.
Exactly worded as such,
"what percentage of modern serious fights, serious being say title fights and other fights between established names, end in actual knockouts, not TKOs?"
Thanks!
It's impossible to determine.
Sample : As soon as David Diaz hit the deck Drackulich waved it off for a TKO. It should have been a KO victory.
Many other fights went like this.
Re: KO Percentages Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Whether its in the record books as TKO or KO, it is completely the same thing.
I agree Bilbo Baggins.
Re: KO Percentages Question
They very rarely do the full 10 count now as if it's clear the guy isn't getting up they try to get the medical teams in there asap. I don't know how they determine if one is a KO or TKO. Look at Hatton's knockouts. The Pacquiao one was waved off by Kenny Bayless as it was clear Hatton wasn't getting up, but I also doubt he would have got up from the Mayweather one, but that becomes a TKO as Cortez stepped in Mayweather's way as Hatton hit the canvas.
Re: KO Percentages Question
Actual 10 counts now are rare. In the interest of safety the ref will stop counting if he thinks the fighter is gone, like say Taylor was against Abraham. I think he got to 6 and that was too long, Jermain wouldn't have got up if he counted 10 hours.
Re: KO Percentages Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
miron_lang
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Whether its in the record books as TKO or KO, it is completely the same thing.
I agree Bilbo Baggins.
still the question was about HOW these fights are recorded ... not how they SHOULD be
Re: KO Percentages Question
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hitmanhatton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Youngblood
ya that seems kinda strange to me. you'd think if anythng deserves a ko it is the dude not making it thru the count because the ref. considered saving his life might take priority at that moment.
think doing it by the proper definitions of a 'ko' or 'TKO' is the only fair way to record these stoppages
for example hatton and david diaz werent gonna be getting up if there was a 30 second count in their fights against pac,
however take juan diaz against marquez, he may have been able to although all 3 fights were stopped without a count
is it fair for marquez to get the 'KO' ?
Of course it's fair! Watch the fight here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-cw4olewYc
He was done, if they carry on he gets ko'd.
Basically a TKO is no less impressive than a KO anyway, a KO just means knocked out, i.e counted out, a TKO just means the referee stopped the fight because the fighter was clearly about to be KO'd so he intervened for the fighter's safety.
It's like in chess. Very rarely will see an actual checkmate in grandmaster practice, even at amatuer level because the losing player will resign before the mate is delivered.
Does this mean it's less of a win than a genuine checkmate? Of course not, the checkmate was inevitable so they stopped the game early to avoid having to see it played out over the board.
In the Diaz Marquez fight a ko is just as inevitable but it comes also with the health risk to Diaz if its played out so the ref saves him from further punishment.
So it reads TKO, but to all intents and purposes it's a KO, becuase it if carried on Diaz would eventually get hurt so bad he couldn't make the count.
So Marquez deserves the KO, but a TKO is the same thing really, a knockout is a knockout after all.
Call me old-fashioned but that looks pretty much of a KO as you can get.
