Not a ROBBERY Please look :D

[miron_lang]

I suspect it's not that people don't get it, but rather that they disagree about the significance of it. If same fighter gets all eight of the 50-50 rounds, you can't complain about any of the rounds, but you can complain about the fight. It's like a roulette wheel that comes up red every time. There's no reason it shouldn't have on any given spin, but when it happens every time, there's a question in the whole that isn't necessarily just answered by the sum of the parts.

It would appear that sometime it is wrong but that is the way in scoring fights ( 10 pt must

ALL CLOSE or UNCLEAR ROUNDS most likely wont be split between the fighters but to the fighters work of his preference.

Example.


Johny vs Pedro

Round 1 : Johny Dominates Pedro
Round 2 : Johny Dominates Pedro
Round 3 : Johny Dominates Pedro
Round 4 : Johny Dominates Pedro
Round 5 : Johny Dominates Pedro

Round 6 : 50-50 Judges give round to pedro because of their preference ( Agression, Defense blah blah blah )

Round 7 : 50-50 Judges give round to pedro because of their preference
Round 8 : 50-50 Judges give round to pedro because of their preference
Round 9 : 50-50 Judges give round to pedro because of their preference
Round 10 : 50-50 Judges give round to pedro because of their preference
Round 11 : 50-50 Judges give round to pedro because of their preference
Round 12 : 50-50 Judges give round to pedro because of their preference



Pedro wins and Johny appears to be robbed in the eyes of the crowd. but the official winner is Pedro 115-113.



If a judge split the even rounds then question of consistency comes to play.

Does a judge gives the next even round to Fighter A because he gave the previous even round to figter B? That type of judging is more open to question IMO. Judges must be consistent.