English Español
Advertisement
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    1,138

    Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    The reason I post this thread now is due to the Gomez-Paredes fight last night. Parades scored two knockdowns of Gomez in two separate rounds and in each case they were questionable to say the least.

    The first time, Paredes landed a glancing left to Gomez's shoulder while Gomez was swinging with his own right and fell down off balance from the momentum of that punch attempt.

    The second time Gomez was off balance again when a glancing punch landed as he turned almost towards his back and fell again apparently more from being off balance than anything else. The replay showed the punch that landed was very minimal at best.

    The first knockdown came at the end of a round Gomez was clearly dominating. The second came at the start of a round which afterward went on to be controlled by Gomez.

    Most of the other rounds Gomez was in control and appeared to win (maybe one or two were closer and could be swing rounds).

    Interesting that one judge scored the fight 99-92, another 98-92 and third 96-93 all for Gomez.

    The 99-92 card is interesting because that judge must have scored one of those knockdown rounds even (10-10), the other for Paredes (10-9) and all other rounds for Gomez. I haven't seen the official scorecards so I could be wrong here but that is what I think happened.

    The 98-92 card probably then scored those knockdown rounds for Paredes (10-9) and all other rounds for Gomez.

    And the 96-93 card, well I don't know. Maybe both the knockdown rounds were for Paredes (10-8) and there was an even round in there.

    When I scored the fight, I scored the two rounds 10-9 for Paredes but thought a couple things...one sick to my stomach giving those rounds to Parades and doubting myself doing so (but saying if I were a judge I would abide by the refs decision) and two telling myself there is now way the judges are going to score like I did (thinking they would all go the 10-8 variety).

    So here is my question...how does everyone score rounds where a knockdown is scored for fighter B that does not appear to be legitimate to your eyes and that fighter A dominated? Is 10-10 the way to go because that is what you feel is right, is 10-9 for fighter B the way to go still honoring the referee's call, 10-8 for fighter B because that is how you feel knockdown rounds should be scored or something else?

    On a side note, this fight was a great example of why instant replay should be utilized in the sport when it is possible. Thankfully the outcome was not affected here but it could have been.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,437

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    I have to score it 10-8 for the knockdown. I don't feel good about it. The inept ref has to be respected . Unfortunately .

  3. #3
    Advanced Users
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    9,518

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    Nevermind your eyes. Sometimes you may have a bad connection to the neurons. And the eyes will lie. Hehehe! Just jiving!

    In the pros, you must abide by the referee's call -- which can be overturned by the commissioner nowadays. (Remember back in the day in New Jersey, Richard Savage would ignore all powers of the referee, and even jump into the ring.)

    In the amateurs, a knockdown is not anymore than a featherlike punch no matter how vicious the knockdown may look. Holla!

  4. #4
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,472

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    Quote Originally Posted by Radam G View Post
    Nevermind your eyes. Sometimes you may have a bad connection to the neurons. And the eyes will lie. Hehehe! Just jiving!

    In the pros, you must abide by the referee's call -- which can be overturned by the commissioner nowadays. (Remember back in the day in New Jersey, Richard Savage would ignore all powers of the referee, and even jump into the ring.)

    In the amateurs, a knockdown is not anymore than a featherlike punch no matter how vicious the knockdown may look. Holla!
    Richard Savage? Do you mean Larry Hazzard?

  5. #5
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    1,590

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    Oubobcat, you are a fight fan after my own heart. When I was watching the fight, I, too, felt the knockdowns were b.s. I scored both of those knockdown rounds 10-9 for Paredes, but really thought I should have made one of them 10-10 (I never change my card once I'm scoring).

    Here's the story on knockdowns, gentlemen. If a referee calls a knockdown, it must be acknowledged as such. However, there is no written rule that a dropped fighter loses the round 10-9. Are all knockdowns the same? No!

    A fighter may go down (like Gomez went down)--from being off balance or slipping while throwing a punch and getting tagged at the same time, then jumping right up on steady legs, clear-eyed and ready to fight. Or, he may walk into a crushing shot, go down, roll around in pain, struggle to his feet, just beat the count, then stand on spaghetti legs with eyes which are unfocused and looking in different directions. If he should survive the round, he will lose it by a 10-8 score. Are you going to tell me that the first guy, the one who went down for an instant--for no count--and got right up, should lose the round by the same 10-8 score?

    Let's take it a step further. Say each of the dropped fighters was winning the round or goes on to win the remainder of the round. Are both rounds still 10-8 because of the knockdown? In the case of the fighter who went down hard and almost for the count, he indeed will drop the round by a 10-8 score. But I have a problem with a man winning the round--except for the momentary knockdown--losing by a 10-8 score.

    In training seminars I give, I tell judges to watch each round carefully...to weigh the effect of a knockdown. In the case of Gomez, he won both of the rounds in which he was dropped. Both of them! So, you can rule out him losing either of them 10-8. In fact, in one of those rounds, he was so dominant, that judge Dave Moretti called it even at 10-10. Moretti should be commended for that. I am glad he will be one of the judges for Saturday's showdown between Canelo Alvarez & Erislandy Lara.

    So, when those questionable knockdowns occur, keep an eye on the scorecards. Chances are that at least one of the judges will score the round 10-9, especially if the downed fighter owned a majority of the round before and after his questionable knockddown.

    Nice job, Dave Moretti. Great thread, bobcat!

    -Randy G.
    Last edited by The Commish; 07-11-2014 at 06:41 AM.

  6. #6
    Advanced Users
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    9,518

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    Quote Originally Posted by dino da vinci View Post
    Richard Savage? Do you mean Larry Hazzard?
    My bad! Definitely I mean "Carrie" Larry Hazard. Danggit Rev. Richard Savage was on my mind because I saw this lady, who I was going to knock boots with years ago in Sin City, in Manila. We were talking about how the Rev. Savage jumped us out of sinning on the night in question. Holla!
    Last edited by Radam G; 07-11-2014 at 07:22 AM.

  7. #7
    Advanced Users brownsugar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Home of the Buckeyes
    Posts
    4,553

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    I think part of the mastery of the sport of boxing is staying on your feet. I agree with everyone regarding the knockdowns. But I also believe in giving a knockdown and ABSOLUTE VALUE, (plus 2 points against the one who fell) whether the fighter slips on a glob of spit, ... latent puddles of water left in the ring by the corner men or after being maneuvered into an awkward off balance position that results in a fall, as long as the knockdown to associated with a landed punch.

    this eliminates introspective debates and intense interpretation of the rules.... keep it simple.

    If the fighters don't like it they should practice in rings where the surface has been coated in cooking oil to perfect their balance. or spar on wet ice.

    The same is true with Sumo wrestlers. if they leave the ring for any reason, it's scored against them.

    I believe boxing.... and sports in general should be kept as simple as possible to keep things moving.
    there should be no reason to delay a fight due to a complex call and interpretation of the rules... (like certain baseball calls) boxing is integrally tied to stamina,
    taking to many long breaks to deliberate a call will cause an unnatural flow in the action.

    but that's just my opinion, in a sea of conflicting yet valid opinions.

  8. #8
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,472

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    But it's not 2 points for the one who fell. That's people finding their way into a position of power, changing the rules without having a clue and confusing an already muddled situation. Like a particular Pope whom when he came into power was like "what's behind this door?", and "I'm infallible, I like the sound of this, explain it to me again because we're definitely going to be using this stuff".

    I don't care who you put on the other side of this discussion, there is no two point knockdown. (No Santa, no Easter Bunny, no Nellie, no Tooth Fairy, no two point knockdown). Every knockdown counts for one point. One. Doesn't matter if it is the first of the fight or the fifth in a round. One. One point. Take all the ONE POINT knockdowns, put them on the side. Score the round. Who won the round? "Well, if it wasn't for the knockdown, fighter B clearly won the round". Then fighter B won the round. Granted, it becomes a whole lot easier to win the round when you dropped the opponent in the process, but by itself, you haven't won anything yet. I love listening to guys who are clueless on the fight game, argue about knockdowns.
    My favorite (I can hear Radam running into the room as I type this) is the people who argue that JMM couldn't possibly have won the first fight against the legend because he was dropped three times in the first round. Then why on God's green earth continue then? Oh, I know, in the event Marquez throws a virtual shutout the rest of the way! But wait, you say. What about those three knockdowns? Marquez never knocked him down? People, this is not a knockdown contest, it's a boxing match. How many times do you want to score the same knockdown?

    A boxing match. Say it with me good people, a boxing match. Like brown said, a knockdown is a knockdown. One isn't worth two and another worth one. The first one of the round is worth one point, as is every one thereafter. How can fighter A be winning the round in a huge way, get caught with a shot, down and back up and suddenly is 10-8 against, as if all his earlier work in the round counted for zero? Look, we're going through a bad time in the sport that has not only multiple champions in the same weight division, but multiple champions in the same weight division within the same organization. It's not reality. Nor is a two point knockdown.

    The mere fact that one fighter could drop a guy with one quasi punch and the other could hit him back moments later with a 72 piece assorted nuclear bombardment, landing everything and in a large way, with or without a knockdown ensuing, and I assure you, I'm not going straight to 10-8 to make some delusional guy who never boxed happy, because his puppets can't figure it out because it's now just a bit more confusing.

    Back to JMM and Pacman. I actually heard the drums being pounded as they fought their second fight, you know, PAC dropped him three times in the first round. Not, you know, Pac may not have won another round after the knockdowns, but they not only wanted to keep scoring the knockdowns after the first round ended, but right on through the second fight. This is mind boggling! What this, the 5th grade? Everybody grow up and learn how to score a fight, although be careful who you learn from. Carrying over success from earlier rounds (and previous fights) can strain even the mightiest pencil.

  9. #9
    Advanced Users brownsugar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Home of the Buckeyes
    Posts
    4,553

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    Quote Originally Posted by dino da vinci View Post
    But it's not 2 points for the one who fell. That's people finding their way into a position of power, changing the rules without having a clue and confusing an already muddled situation. Like a particular Pope whom when he came into power was like "what's behind this door?", and "I'm infallible, I like the sound of this, explain it to me again because we're definitely going to be using this stuff".

    I don't care who you put on the other side of this discussion, there is no two point knockdown. (No Santa, no Easter Bunny, no Nellie, no Tooth Fairy, no two point knockdown). Every knockdown counts for one point. One. Doesn't matter if it is the first of the fight or the fifth in a round. One. One point. Take all the ONE POINT knockdowns, put them on the side. Score the round. Who won the round? "Well, if it wasn't for the knockdown, fighter B clearly won the round". Then fighter B won the round. Granted, it becomes a whole lot easier to win the round when you dropped the opponent in the process, but by itself, you haven't won anything yet. I love listening to guys who are clueless on the fight game, argue about knockdowns.
    My favorite (I can hear Radam running into the room as I type this) is the people who argue that JMM couldn't possibly have won the first fight against the legend because he was dropped three times in the first round. Then why on God's green earth continue then? Oh, I know, in the event Marquez throws a virtual shutout the rest of the way! But wait, you say. What about those three knockdowns? Marquez never knocked him down? People, this is not a knockdown contest, it's a boxing match. How many times do you want to score the same knockdown?

    A boxing match. Say it with me good people, a boxing match. Like brown said, a knockdown is a knockdown. One isn't worth two and another worth one. The first one of the round is worth one point, as is every one thereafter. How can fighter A be winning the round in a huge way, get caught with a shot, down and back up and suddenly is 10-8 against, as if all his earlier work in the round counted for zero? Look, we're going through a bad time in the sport that has not only multiple champions in the same weight division, but multiple champions in the same weight division within the same organization. It's not reality. Nor is a two point knockdown.

    The mere fact that one fighter could drop a guy with one quasi punch and the other could hit him back moments later with a 72 piece assorted nuclear bombardment, landing everything and in a large way, with or without a knockdown ensuing, and I assure you, I'm not going straight to 10-8 to make some delusional guy who never boxed happy, because his puppets can't figure it out because it's now just a bit more confusing.

    Back to JMM and Pacman. I actually heard the drums being pounded as they fought their second fight, you know, PAC dropped him three times in the first round. Not, you know, Pac may not have won another round after the knockdowns, but they not only wanted to keep scoring the knockdowns after the first round ended, but right on through the second fight. This is mind boggling! What this, the 5th grade? Everybody grow up and learn how to score a fight, although be careful who you learn from. Carrying over success from earlier rounds (and previous fights) can strain even the mightiest pencil.
    That makes sense Dino.... My point is...the value of a knock down should be absolute. If that value is one point. Then its a point. The officials shouldn't have to differentiate about varying values of a knockdown as long as the fighter falling meets the criteria.

  10. #10
    Advanced Users
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    9,518

    Re: Scoring of Rounds When Questionable Knockdown Occurs?

    Quote Originally Posted by dino da vinci View Post
    But it's not 2 points for the one who fell. That's people finding their way into a position of power, changing the rules without having a clue and confusing an already muddled situation. Like a particular Pope whom when he came into power was like "what's behind this door?", and "I'm infallible, I like the sound of this, explain it to me again because we're definitely going to be using this stuff".

    I don't care who you put on the other side of this discussion, there is no two point knockdown. (No Santa, no Easter Bunny, no Nellie, no Tooth Fairy, no two point knockdown). Every knockdown counts for one point. One. Doesn't matter if it is the first of the fight or the fifth in a round. One. One point. Take all the ONE POINT knockdowns, put them on the side. Score the round. Who won the round? "Well, if it wasn't for the knockdown, fighter B clearly won the round". Then fighter B won the round. Granted, it becomes a whole lot easier to win the round when you dropped the opponent in the process, but by itself, you haven't won anything yet. I love listening to guys who are clueless on the fight game, argue about knockdowns.
    My favorite (I can hear Radam running into the room as I type this) is the people who argue that JMM couldn't possibly have won the first fight against the legend because he was dropped three times in the first round. Then why on God's green earth continue then? Oh, I know, in the event Marquez throws a virtual shutout the rest of the way! But wait, you say. What about those three knockdowns? Marquez never knocked him down? People, this is not a knockdown contest, it's a boxing match. How many times do you want to score the same knockdown?

    A boxing match. Say it with me good people, a boxing match. Like brown said, a knockdown is a knockdown. One isn't worth two and another worth one. The first one of the round is worth one point, as is every one thereafter. How can fighter A be winning the round in a huge way, get caught with a shot, down and back up and suddenly is 10-8 against, as if all his earlier work in the round counted for zero? Look, we're going through a bad time in the sport that has not only multiple champions in the same weight division, but multiple champions in the same weight division within the same organization. It's not reality. Nor is a two point knockdown.

    The mere fact that one fighter could drop a guy with one quasi punch and the other could hit him back moments later with a 72 piece assorted nuclear bombardment, landing everything and in a large way, with or without a knockdown ensuing, and I assure you, I'm not going straight to 10-8 to make some delusional guy who never boxed happy, because his puppets can't figure it out because it's now just a bit more confusing.

    Back to JMM and Pacman. I actually heard the drums being pounded as they fought their second fight, you know, PAC dropped him three times in the first round. Not, you know, Pac may not have won another round after the knockdowns, but they not only wanted to keep scoring the knockdowns after the first round ended, but right on through the second fight. This is mind boggling! What this, the 5th grade? Everybody grow up and learn how to score a fight, although be careful who you learn from. Carrying over success from earlier rounds (and previous fights) can strain even the mightiest pencil.
    Wow! No Santa! No Tooth Fairy! No Easter Bunny! And not even a Nellie! Oh SHUUUUUUCKS! I've been lied to! Next they will tell me that there is no Jiminy the cricket. That no Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall. No Humpty Dumpty had a bad fall. And all the king's horses, and all the king's men were just on "dat syet," that Pops Joy May always holla about. I don't know rather to cry, or, OH MY FUDGING GOODNESS, to shout.

    I have to roll with the extras points for knockdowns. You get knocked on your butt, you lose the round unless you get a payback knockdown or the opponent gets a point taken off for a foul.

    The first thing that you are taught in boxing is balance. And if that balance is so bad that you go down: that is just "the tears of a clown" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXkZf2xjdKA.

    We cannot nitpick what we don't like about our sport. We ain't ever going to be straight. And like the late, great music man "Little Tim" said: "It is always going to be crooked like a banana...and everybody is going to keep going apesyet" about the things that rub them the wrong way.

    Matter of fact, my goduncles Tim sang a song about a banana: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mn3jcT4XAxk. Hehe! Holla!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •