Refs need to start exercising their right to hand out 10-8 rounds

[gest12645]

Is it just me, or is anyone else getting sick of seeing a guy NARROWLY edge out a round and get 10-9, and then see a guy rock his opponent 7 or 8 times and have him on the verge of being knocked out, and get the same 10-9 score? It's retarded. A guy who beats the shit out of his opponent in a round should, for all intents and purposes, get more of an advantage on the scorecards than a guy who pulled out a close "feeling out" round.

Of course I'm talking about Bradley getting his ass handed to him in round 2 by his Siberian opponent, only for it to be scored 10-9.

They have the right to hand out a 10-8 without a knockdown, I just wish these people judges would have the balls to do it.

I agree. Excellent post. Hopefully 10-8 rounds without a kd will be used more in the future. It just isn't fair that a fighter totally dominates a round , while the other guy edges a round , and the fight is even. Cheers

[J_C]

Just to play devils advocate here (cos honestly I do see merit in your argument).

But you could say it is harsh to judge against the fighter who had the courage and strength NOT to go down. Using the 2nd round with Bradley last night as an example, he didnt get knocked down but it can still go down as a 10-8? Why not just take a knee and buy some extra breathing space if its scored the same whether he does go down or not? Or would taking a knee and getting battered also be a 10-7? It kinda opens a new can of worms in some regard

[gest12645]

Just to play devils advocate here (cos honestly I do see merit in your argument).

But you could say it is harsh to judge against the fighter who had the courage and strength NOT to go down. Using the 2nd round with Bradley last night as an example, he didnt get knocked down but it can still go down as a 10-8? Why not just take a knee and buy some extra breathing space if its scored the same whether he does go down or not? Or would taking a knee and getting battered also be a 10-7? It kinda opens a new can of worms in some regard

true , but still , I think a beating in a round is more rewarding than a simple box and move strategy. This isn't the first fight where it happened . example - Dawson vs Johnson

[IamInuit]

Just to play devils advocate here (cos honestly I do see merit in your argument).

But you could say it is harsh to judge against the fighter who had the courage and strength NOT to go down. Using the 2nd round with Bradley last night as an example, he didnt get knocked down but it can still go down as a 10-8? Why not just take a knee and buy some extra breathing space if its scored the same whether he does go down or not? Or would taking a knee and getting battered also be a 10-7? It kinda opens a new can of worms in some regard

If you take a knee you submit to a 10/8. Not sure what you are advocating. @Freedom posted this earlier. How the flying expletive is that not called a 10/8 round?

[gest12645]

Just to play devils advocate here (cos honestly I do see merit in your argument).

But you could say it is harsh to judge against the fighter who had the courage and strength NOT to go down. Using the 2nd round with Bradley last night as an example, he didnt get knocked down but it can still go down as a 10-8? Why not just take a knee and buy some extra breathing space if its scored the same whether he does go down or not? Or would taking a knee and getting battered also be a 10-7? It kinda opens a new can of worms in some regard

If you take a knee you submit to a 10/8. Not sure what you are advocating. @Freedom posted this earlier. How the flying expletive is that not called a 10/8 round?

it should be. Ref must be thinking, oo f**k , i made a mistake

[ross]

Looking at that little clip, how many times does a ref need to walk after a fighter and restart his instruction before he thinks to himself "oh look, he is hurt"

[J_C]

Thats a clip from the 1st round. I was making reference to the 2nd round where he was getting rocked bad but didnt go down.

[greynotsoold]

A judge can score a round however he sees fit. That was the whole idea behind going from a rounds system to a points system, to differentiate between a guy winning a round and a guy winning it big. There was a movement back in the early to mid 90s, if my recollection is correct (it may have been late 80s to early 90s), to encourage judges to use the entire 10 point system. The ten point system, if I understand correctly, was a reaction to the 5 point system and the variance a 2 point round would create in scoring. That has never made sense to me, really, though I do recall a fight years ago with 5-1, and 5-2 rounds.
And then the Brits had a system where they used half points; 10-9.5, for example. That was only phased out 25 years (or so) ago, or less.

[Beanflicker]

Just to play devils advocate here (cos honestly I do see merit in your argument).

But you could say it is harsh to judge against the fighter who had the courage and strength NOT to go down. Using the 2nd round with Bradley last night as an example, he didnt get knocked down but it can still go down as a 10-8? Why not just take a knee and buy some extra breathing space if its scored the same whether he does go down or not? Or would taking a knee and getting battered also be a 10-7? It kinda opens a new can of worms in some regard

It's not really a new can of worms, because judges have not only the ability, but the responsibility to distinguish between what is a 10-9 and 10-8 round, regardless of whether or not there was a knockdown. That's one thing that a lot of boxing fans seem to be unaware of or just don't understand: you don't need to score a knockdown to win a 10-8 round.

As far as your argument, I can see what you're getting at but the fact is boxing DOES NOT score points for courage or toughness. Those are great traits to have, but the philosophy of boxing, the sweet science, is to hit and not get hit. So if you have the courage and toughness to survive a brutal onslaught, great, that gives you the ability to fight on and try to turn the fight around (just like Bradley did). But under no circumstances should a guy be REWARDED for taking a beating.

The point of the 10-point must system was to quantify how dominant a guy was in a certain round, and if the Siberian guy is getting the same score for what he did to Bradley in round 2 as Floyd Mayweather would for winning a round with a few pawing jabs, there's something seriously wrong with the system.