Can you score a round with a knockdown 10-9? 10-10? What is the deal?

[W1LL]

I was always under the impression it is an automatic 10-8 round. Then with every extra knockdown it goes 10-7, 10-6 etc. But apprently that is not strictly the case in any rulebook.

One of the judge's for the first Marquez - Pacquiao fight scored the first round (in which Marquez was knocked down 3 times) 10-7 instead of 10-6 as would have made sense according to this way of thinking. His arguement was that Marquez won the round besides the three KDs, so he only took 3 points instead of 4... seriously that is his explanation.

Are there any examples of this happening in rounds with one knockdown? Would you be okay with a 10-8 round being scored 10-9, if the boxer who was KD won the rest of the round? Think Fury vs. Wilder, were Fury got caught with lucky punches and otherwise dominated the round, on both occasions.

[Lomadeaux]

A lot of Judges in the past (probably present too) won't go below 10-7 because it doesn't give the fighter a chance to come back on the cards. I'm not a big fan of that.

It doesn't get scored 10-9 if there is a knockdown and you think the fighter who got knocked down won the round. It would be scored 9-9. Understand? 10 for the fighter who won the round (minus the 1 point knockdown). Remember, 10 point must system, then adjust the scores from there.

[Lomadeaux]

Think Fury vs. Wilder, were Fury got caught with lucky punches and otherwise dominated the round, on both occasions.

Absolutely not. Both of those knockdowns were legitimate, firm, scoring knockdowns and Fury did not dominate the round. He may have controlled it, but he did not dominate it.

If Fury were to get a 9-9 in either of those rounds, he would have had to hurt Wilder and completely dominate him that round. The last knockdown there's no way that score would have flown. A knockdown involving a 9-9 round would be something much different.

[Zaryu]

I think it's possible, but very rare, for there to be a legit example where it would make sense. The Pacquiao vs Marquez example is not one of those legitimate situations in my opinion.

I think that if fighter A knocks down fighter B, but it's a flash knockdown, but fighter B was winning the round and comes back to dominate, even hurting, fighter A in the same round, I think scoring the round 10-9 or even 10-10 (depending the extent of the domination) makes sense. But normally a knockdown gets you an extra point, and that should not be messed with too much.

[New England]

you can't score it 10-10 if there's a knockdown. you lose a point for getting knocked down. almost always the guy who knocks down his opponent "wins" the round on the "10 point must," IE the fighter who wins the round gets 10 points. loser gets 9 points minus 1 for the knockdown. 10-8 round.

there are occasions where judges will score a round 10-9 even in pro fights, but it's extremely rare. the guy who gets knocked down has to come back and whoop ass without dropping his opponent. you see this more on the "layman" card, and i don't see any issue with it. a flash knockdown is worth less than a three minute beating when you're scoring damage. that's my opinion.


you can also see 9-9 if the guy who drops his opponent has a point taken away.


in cases where both fighters go down the judges usually award a 10-9 round to the guy who they believe won the balance of the round. again, the winner "MUST" be awarded 10 points, and can only lose them if he fouls.

[Ray*]

I think to simplify it, it has now become the norm that once you get KD, you automatically lose that round, even if you land more shots, and you battered your opponent.

[dannnnn]

It's subjective but yes, if a boxer suffers a knockdown but otherwise clearly wins the round they should regain a point and it should be scored 10-9 instead of 10-8. Likewise you can score a round 10-8 even with no knockdowns if it's a real one-sided beatdown.
Personally I think a lot more flexibility with the scoring (to differentiate widely won rounds from close ones) would be a big improvement for boxing.

As for the Pacquiao vs. Marquez example, I disagree with the judge who scored it only a 10-7 round. I don't see how you can argue that Marquez even won that round without the knockdowns, let alone clearly and decisively. It was tit-for-tat before the first knockdown and from then on it was all Manny. The beating that Marquez took in the last twenty seconds alone far eclipses anything which happened before the first knockdown.
Somewhat ironically, the first fight being the only fight of theirs in which Pacquiao did not get the decision is actually the one I feel he can make the strongest case for having legitimately won. For me, Marquez clearly won the second, third (and obviously fourth) fights.

As for Fury-Wilder, I think you can only argue the first knockdown if you want to make a case for a potential 10-9, because it was more of a flash knockdown. I can't remember what happened in the rest of that particular round though so I can't say. The twelth round is a clear 10-8 regardless. It's a miracle he even got up. And no, he didn't "dominate" the rest of the round. He got hit flush with a long sweeping left hook after he got up and driven back to the ropes, looking like he was about to get stopped, but then eventually came back with a nice 1-2 and quelled Wilder's aggression. There's no way that round's anything but a 10-8. Even so (with two 10-8 rounds), Fury undoubtedly won that fight.

[New England]

I was always under the impression it is an automatic 10-8 round. Then with every extra knockdown it goes 10-7, 10-6 etc. But apprently that is not strictly the case in any rulebook.

One of the judge's for the first Marquez - Pacquiao fight scored the first round (in which Marquez was knocked down 3 times) 10-7 instead of 10-6 as would have made sense according to this way of thinking. His arguement was that Marquez won the round besides the three KDs, so he only took 3 points instead of 4... seriously that is his explanation.

Are there any examples of this happening in rounds with one knockdown? Would you be okay with a 10-8 round being scored 10-9, if the boxer who was KD won the rest of the round? Think Fury vs. Wilder, were Fury got caught with lucky punches and otherwise dominated the round, on both occasions.

holy guacamole you guys don't even open your eyes when you watch fights.

[MDPopescu]

I think to simplify it, it has now become the norm that once you get KD, you automatically lose that round, even if you land more shots, and you battered your opponent.

... that's it... (10 point must system = the winner of the round MUST be awarded 10 points)... because the fighter (who was floored) will automatically lose the round...

[Boxing Goat]

You can't score it 10-10 but if the fighter who was knocked down won the rd. , then you can score it 9-9.