Why don't people/Judges use the 10-10 round very often?

[donnydarkoIRL]

Good point Hitmandonny, fighters have built there career and tactics and technique around the current system.

A change in the system would be hard for many fighters to adapt to.

I would like to see a system where drawn rounds are scored a little more often than they currently are and perhaps this could be tested a bit like the WBC did, or are doing with the open scoring system. I cant see it happening though as its not seen as an exciting move, i think it would be a fairer system though in the long term if fighters adapted to it

Thats a fair point.
In fact it wouldn't be a change as much as it would be an adjustment.
If the judges were shown a different method of scoring, rather than such a subjective personalised view it would be easier.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

it's already subjective from the fighters/judges/fans points of view and open to interpretation hence we get all the 'he was robbed threads'. The fact that you don't often get 10-10 rounds means you can have a very close fight being scored a W but with a huge margin.

[RozzySean]

I agree that judges should be pressured to avoid 10-10 rounds, with the key word being "avoid" as opposed "prohibit." Judges should try whenever possible to give the round to somebody. Yeah, sometimes you have to give 10-10 rounds. Sometimes rounds are too close to call, but you don't pressure the judges to avoid even rounds, they will pussy out of the hard decisions. There should never be more than one or two even rounds in 12 round fight if the judge knows how to score a fight, and two rounds even should happen very infrequently. A judge should have an idea of a what they want to see, an opinion about what makes for effective boxing, and far more times than not, one fighter is going show a little more of what a good judge considers effectiveness.

[Althugz]

I hate when people score rounds even and I'll tell you why. Like said above, it is a LAZY WAY OUT. Think about it: How many times is a round DEAD even. Both fighters landed the same kind of shots, the same number of shots, showed the same ring generalship, ect? VERY VERY rarely. There are SOOOO many small, subtle details that dictate boxing and if you don't watch for and pick up on these, you have no business scoring a fight, let alone being a professional judge.

When I see someone score a round even, more often than not I think that reflects that person's inability to see the whole picture. I feel that person is just sitting there, waiting to see who lands the hardest punch, and if its a slow paced round where no one really landed a big shot they score it even. THERE IS MORE TO BOXING THAN THAT.

I see your point but if professional judges are supposed to see these 'subtle details' then why do no 3 judges ever have the same scorecard? It still boils down to favouritism or if you're thinking about it more innocently, the scoring of close rounds as 10-9 rounds because they feel pressured not to score the round even.

Good points though everyone..Thanks for the input. Remind me to give you all rep when my punch power increases

[Dizaster]

I actually agree with the system they have now. I prefer them to pick a winner for each round. But I was putting in mind those fights that are close, where judges can see it so differently. In a very very even round, a good judge can look for those subtleties, for sure.. So say, you pick, someone was more controlling with the jab,,, that's a winner of the round for me.. Another judge seeing the same fight isn't that impressed with the jab.. Sure it's keeping the other guy back, but it's not doing any damage, and the other guy hasn't looked phased by it.. He's actually gotten in a few times and landed some decent shots.. So he's going to give it to the other fighter. This goes on for 8 rounds. And there is probably a large gap on the 2 judges scorecards now.. They are both good judges and can pick subtleties out which put one fighter over the edge each round.. But what subtleties are they? They are not the same..

Generally though, I think between 3 judges they get the winner right most of the time.. In a very close fight, it's these subtleties that can go either way, depeneding on how they see the fight.. The robberies.. Where they see subtleties for one fighter, and you see them for another.
There are 6 or 7 close rounds that could go either way,,, they score them one way, you score them another, and at the end someone wins convincingly and we have 3 threads saying how shit the judges are and how etc etc easily won 4 or 5 of those close rounds.. And even if they didn't win, the margin is still way to much.. Some people complain that the scores at the end are wayyyyy out, yet 3/4 of the fight was very even and could go either way, so way can't they all go one way?

The point i'm saying is, in a bunch of even rounds, judges usually do a good job of picking out things a fighter did to give the round to them... Just the judges can easily pick different things and give the round to different fighters.... If it was easy, then it wasn't a close round.. You have to take your pick of a more dominant jab, or more power punches... Unless there is a set of rules set out saying that in a close round, the jab is more important, ring control is more important, aggressiveness is more important,,, then the judges can score a fight hugely different and neither will really be wrong.. It's how they perceive the subleties...

This is just food for thought.. I think the 10-9 round is a part of boxing, and sport.. Every sport has judges or umpires or referee's and they are human... They are trusted to use their judgement and sometimes it may not be right. Sometimes their judgement can affect the result of a match.
So I guess if in a very close round, they can find some small subtle reason why one fighter should be awarded the round, then that's what they should do... If they are encouraged to do that, then i'm sure they'll pick something that puts one fighter ahead....


I guess THAT may be the new point of the topic.. In a very every close round, what subtle things would a judge look for to give a round to a certain fighter, and why do the judges sometimes see different things and give it to different fighters?