It’s been happening more and more recently. Please can you start showing the judges breakdowns for each round because I’m convinced 10-8 rounds are not automatic 10-8 rounds for knockdowns.
Also had this fight
It doesn’t apply in this case, but I always thought a KD just meant a point off the opponent, so if a fighter clearly loses a round but knocks the guy down, it would be 9-9.
Nothing has changed in the fight model or scoring functions since dinosaurs ruled the earth. There is your answer 
No. They are scored auto 10-8
Thanks for clarifying how it works in game - I thought it would mirror IRL boxing (the below is from the BBoBC, but the WBA says similar in less detail, at which point I stopped checking)
-
One area on which the Regulations are silent, and thus give Referees and Judges discretion, is how to score a round in which one or more knockdowns are scored. It is commonly thought that if a Boxer scores a knockdown in a round, they automatically win the round 10- 8. This is a myth - there is nothing in the Regulations that says this. The myth has arisen because in many cases, the Boxer who scores the knockdown also wins the round, for example due to punches landed before or after the knockdown. In such cases, the round should correctly be scored 10-8, for the reason in example (a) below. But it is not correct to say that the Boxer automatically wins the round 10-8 because of the knockdown: the whole round must be considered and scored in its own right.
-
The way in which a Referee should take a knockdown into account is to consider it as a one- point advantage to the Boxer who has scored the knockdown. The following examples illustrate how this works:
-
(a) Boxer A knocks down Boxer B once, A also wins the round. Score: 10-8 to A (as a normal winning round would be 10-9 to A, but A gains a further one-point advantage for the knockdown).
-
(b) A knocks down B once, but the round is even. Score: 10-9 to A (as an even round would be 10-10, but A gains a one-point advantage for the knockdown).
-
(c) A knocks down B once but B wins the round. Score: 10-10 (as a normal winning round for B would be 10-9 to B, but A gains a one-point advantage for the knockdown).
-
(d) A knocks down B twice, and A also wins the round. Score: 10-7 to A (as a normal winning round would be 10-9 to A, but A gains two further one-point advantages for the knockdowns).
-
(e) A knocks down B twice, and A also wins the round widely, putting B under heavy pressure. Score: 10-6 to A (as a very one-sided winning round can be scored 10-8 to A, even without any knockdowns, A also gains two further one-point advantages for the knockdowns).
-
(f) A knocks down B once, B knocks down A once, and A wins the round. Score: 10-9 to A (as a normal winning round would be 10-9 to A, and the knockdowns cancel each other out).
-
(g) A knocks B down twice, B knocks down A once, and A wins the round. Score: 10-8 to A (as a normal winning round would be 10-9 to A; A’s first knockdown cancels out B’s knockdown, but A gets a one-point advantage for scoring the second knockdown).
-
(h) A wins the round, which is very one-sided although no knockdown is scored. Score: 10-8 to A (as a very one-sided winning round can be scored 10-8).
The above are simple examples, and other situations could of course arise. Note: although it is very rarely required, it is perfectly possible and permissible to score a round more widely than 10-7.
All I’m asking for is a breakdown of scorecards from judges as I’m not convinced.
2 Likes
Sorry @Dagnaldinho I hijacked your thread.
FWIW those two cards do look like bad decisions (which do happen): based on the stats the first one could just be scored even without the KDs, but yeah, it’s difficult not to see your guy winning by at least 2 with the extra KD points taken off
One the second one I would have it 4-1 and 1 tight, but again that means your fighter wins by at least 2
1 Like
I don’t mind dodgey decisions now and then it’s just like real life. I’d just like judges names and a breakdown of how they’ve scored the rounds.
2 Likes
