I think Masato's worried now

[Karaev fan]

The decision was correct, but the judging was not.

As I saw it:
1st - Even (10 - 10)
2nd - Masato (10 - 9)
3rd - Sato (10-9)

There was no way that Masato won the 3rd. But taking account of the whole fight, I feel that it was the right decision.

If the decision had gone the other way, there'd have been much more controversy.

There are no such things as 10-9 rounds. There were no such things as 9-8 rounds either. They literally changed the rules after the fight to justify their illegal judging.

[MAS4T0]

Originally Posted by Karaev fan

There are no such things as 10-9 rounds.

Of course there are. 10-9 is and always has been the most common score awarded for a round, in the absence of a knockdown.

[Karaev fan]

Originally Posted by MAS4T0

Of course there are. 10-9 is and always has been the most common score awarded for a round, in the absence of a knockdown.

Not after a bloody knockdown.

[MaxFR]

The japanese fighter will win a BS decision as usual

[kickboxing_fan1]

Couldn't they have scored the first and second 10-9 to masato and then the third 10-8 to sato?

[MAS4T0]

Originally Posted by Karaev fan

Not after a bloody knockdown.

Yes, but the other than the knockdown, Masato dominated the round.

Had the knockdown been in a round which Sato had won, it would have been 10-8. But as Masato was much more dominant in the round, a score of 10-8 would not have been appropriate, and the score should have been 9-8.

10-9 and 9-8 is the same difference ultimately. Either way, there's one point between them.

[Karaev fan]

Originally Posted by kickboxing_fan1

Couldn't they have scored the first and second 10-9 to masato and then the third 10-8 to sato?

They could have, but they didn't.

According to their open scoring system

1R 10-10
2R 10-9 Masato

After the third round, Sato should have taken the fight because of the KD. But the judges (or rather, Kakuda) makes up a 9-8 scoring (which was in clear violation of the rules, which dictate that the winning fighter will always get 10 points). When pressed on the issue, Kakuda admits that 9-8 scores aren't possible according to the rules, and promised to amend the rule book to fit it in. They effectively screwed Sato over in the judging, then changed the rules afterward so it wasn't illegal.

Had the knockdown been in a round which Sato had won, it would have been 10-8. But as Masato was much more dominant in the round, a score of 10-8 would not have been appropriate, and the score should have been 9-8.

10-9 and 9-8 is the same difference ultimately. Either way, there's one point between them.

Only there was no such thing as a 9-8 round at the time of the fight. They made that system up during it to give Masato another chance.

[MAS4T0]

Originally Posted by Karaev fan

They could have, but they didn't.

According to their open scoring system

1R 10-10
2R 10-9 Masato

After the third round, Sato should have taken the fight because of the KD. But the judges (or rather, Kakuda) makes up a 9-8 scoring (which was in clear violation of the rules, which dictate that the winning fighter will always get 10 points). When pressed on the issue, Kakuda admits that 9-8 scores aren't possible according to the rules, and promised to amend the rule book to fit it in. They effectively screwed Sato over in the judging, then changed the rules afterward so it wasn't illegal.



Only there was no such thing as a 9-8 round at the time of the fight. They made that system up during it to give Masato another chance.

That's what I was getting at.

Sato did not deserve a 10-8 round, but a 9-8 round was not possible. I scored it as 10-9 as there should have been 1 point difference, in the final round (but I'm not sure if that would be allowed either).

Really though, they never needed to score a round 9-8 before, but in this case (although it was in violation of the rules) it was the right call.

Imagine if open scoring had not been in effect, and Sato had won! There would have been a huge backlash.

In a sense, the judges did screw Sato (by changing the rules mid fight), but the fight did need to go to the extension round. Sato did not deserve to win.

[MAS4T0]

Originally Posted by kickboxing_fan1

Couldn't they have scored the first and second 10-9 to masato and then the third 10-8 to sato?

They could have, and that would have been correct and fair.

The problem was that with open scoring, it's clear how they scored each round. I think that having scored the first 2 rounds as they did, they realised that taking account of all 3 rounds, it would be wrong to give it to Sato.

They therefore gave a BS score for the final round, so that the overall result was what it should have been.

[CPH]

Originally Posted by mas4t0

really though, they never needed to score a round 9-8 before, but in this case (although it was in violation of the rules) it was the right call.

rofl!!!!!