WBA's new scoring system

[ViperSniper]

lloyd mayflower Wrote:

gravytrain Wrote:i think 10-10 rounds need to come back. you don't see them at all anymore. it would make more sense to score 10-10 for a close round instead of flipping a coin to give somebody a 10-9 round and putting the other guy behind.

Yeah totally, thats what i was thinking so i guess i agree with you and romulis. no need to invent a new system, just get people to use the current one as intended.

I think it's because of this, that makes scoring critical. I'm also all for 10-10 rounds but it seems to be looked down on. But I did see why a round shouldn't be scored 10-10 if a fight is so close that neither fighter did enough to take it weather that be through being a quite or competitive round?!


But then again I also can see how scoring rounds differently from close, to clear could work (just like the current one can work) & may be more accurate & the difference in big bouts.

How many times when a there is a case where the scorecards does not reflect the fight? Tough fights to score? Close, debatable or controversial fights?


I actually caught one of Martinez's older fights in Argentina and in the telecast they showed scorecards that were scored with 9.5 rounds. Can't remember which fight, but caught that in anothet telecast in a much older fight.

I'd be keen to see how this turns out for the WBA!

[BrutalBodyShots]

I'm not a huge fan of half points; I'd rather stick with whole numbers rather than arrive at a final score card of 114.5-116.5 or something. The last time we discussed this in an older thread I suggested 10-9 scores for a closely won round and a 10-8 score for a clear, dominant round.

However, 9.5's are ok with me over the current "everything is a 10-9" system.

Without question a revision such as this would give a much better indication of what really happened in the fight.

[ViperSniper]

BrutalBodyShots Wrote:I'm not a huge fan of half points; I'd rather stick with whole numbers rather than arrive at a final score card of 114.5-116.5 or something. The last time we discussed this in an older thread I suggested 10-9 scores for a closely won round and a 10-8 score for a clear, dominant round.

However, 9.5's are ok with me over the current "everything is a 10-9" system.

Without question a revision such as this would give a much better indication of what really happened in the fight.

Brutal what are you thoughts on 10-10 rounds?

Also you suggested 10-8 rounds for clear, dominant rounds. Is that rounds that 'could' have been scored 10-8 without a KD or 10-8 for a 'clear' or certain winner of a round?

Agree that this may be an improvement from the current system. It will always come down to what judges like & look for in how scorecards are scored & viewed. Also how clear, is clear & how close, is close will always be argued when a close or controversial fight comes along.

[blackbelt2003]

BrutalBodyShots Wrote:I'm not a huge fan of half points; I'd rather stick with whole numbers rather than arrive at a final score card of 114.5-116.5 or something. The last time we discussed this in an older thread I suggested 10-9 scores for a closely won round and a 10-8 score for a clear, dominant round.

However, 9.5's are ok with me over the current "everything is a 10-9" system.

Without question a revision such as this would give a much better indication of what really happened in the fight.

This takes out the most dramatic moment in boxing, though....a KNOCKDOWN.


At the moment, a knockdown is a BIG deal. You score one, you've got a two point round. That can make the difference in a fight, whether you're winning or losing.


With a wider scoring basis, however, it means virtually nothing. It's just the same as one fighter clearly winning the round, which spoils the drama of the knockdown for me.





Black

[torvix2000]

I agree. A knockdown must always be a knockdown. Not just a trivial part of boxing.

[BrutalBodyShots]

Black, I'd propose a knock down round be a 10-7 round. I'm pretty sure I wrote about this the last time we had a scoring thread. I'd make it something like:

10-10 = even round
10-9 = close round but you feel one guy won it slightly
10-8 = dominant round you feel one guy clearly won
10-7 = round with a knock down

I do feel that knock downs are significant events in a fight and should be scored accordingly, giving the man standing extra credit for getting it done.

[BrutalBodyShots]

ViperSniper Wrote:

BrutalBodyShots Wrote:I'm not a huge fan of half points; I'd rather stick with whole numbers rather than arrive at a final score card of 114.5-116.5 or something. The last time we discussed this in an older thread I suggested 10-9 scores for a closely won round and a 10-8 score for a clear, dominant round.

However, 9.5's are ok with me over the current "everything is a 10-9" system.

Without question a revision such as this would give a much better indication of what really happened in the fight.

Brutal what are you thoughts on 10-10 rounds?

Also you suggested 10-8 rounds for clear, dominant rounds. Is that rounds that 'could' have been scored 10-8 without a KD or 10-8 for a 'clear' or certain winner of a round?

Agree that this may be an improvement from the current system. It will always come down to what judges like & look for in how scorecards are scored & viewed. Also how clear, is clear & how close, is close will always be argued when a close or controversial fight comes along.

I like 10-10 rounds but if and only if the round is EVEN.

Someone earlier in this thread said something along the lines of they think 10-10 rounds should be used more in CLOSE rounds. I disagree with that. CLOSE to me is not EVEN. CLOSE to me suggests that one guy won, just not by a large margin - so in my view it should be scored accordingly. That close round should fall in between the scoring of an even round (10-10) or a dominant round (10-8) and be scored 10-9.

If it goes a step further, and the round is incredibly dominant to the point that a guy is getting beaten pillar to post but just refuses to go down, I'd propose we score that type of round 10-7, the same as a knock down round (the same way both can be scored 10-8 with the present system).

[ViperSniper]

Gotcha!!

I don't think a close round should be scored an even round! If you can pick s fighter of a round that did more then that fighter should get that round. Even if it comes down to s single punch.

[BrutalBodyShots]

ViperSniper Wrote:Gotcha!!

I don't think a close round should be scored an even round! If you can pick s fighter of a round that did more then that fighter should get that round. Even if it comes down to s single punch.

Absolutely.

The problem with our current system is that if you win a round with 1 punch or you win it with 50 punches, on paper you get the same score... 10-9.

[Romulus9]

The current system is almost like the old rounds system. Instead of 1-0 for winning a round, it's 10-9 so it's easier to score and allows for point-based incentives for knockdowns, for dominance of rounds, and deductions for fouls and such.

There's nothing wrong with the system. The problem is with the idiots doing the scoring, and it's not a new problem. Those who think Pacquiao-Bradley was bad need to look into Jersey Joe Walcott getting straight robbed against Joe Louis in their first meeting.

It's not the scoring. It's the scorers. Know boxing, understand the criteria, use the system correctly, and there's not a problem. We have judges who have no idea how to apply scoring criteria in a fight. Zero. I know it's subjective but they don't grasp the concepts. Mike McCallum couldn't win a close fight to save his life in this present era of scoring because judges are clueless about body punches. Judges are too often fooled by things like work rate without punches landed and ineffective aggression, and trainers have learned to gameplan around such fallacies.

Learn the proper differences between 10-9, 10-10, 10-8, 10-7, and when and how points are taken and why, and the system is fine. Trying to ask these same incompetent judges to start doing fractions at ringside like they're in a grade school math class is just asking for more problems for no reason.