This was my biggest takeaway from it
The biggest challenge is that a 10-9 round has a wide, wide range of what qualifies as a 10-9 round. It could be razor close and be 10-9, and it could be a pretty dominant round and be a 10-9. The proper definition of a 10-8 round is complete domination and significant impact or damage for the majority of the round, with little to no offensive output by the opponent.
Is that really the definition of a 10-8 round judges use? No wonder we never see them. I hate how varying a 10-9 round is to the point it doesn't matter what you do. If you win the 1st round by a hair, and the other guy comes out swining hard. Just accept losing the 2nd round- don't get stopped, and conserve energy so that you can edge him in the 3rd.
It's a best 2 out of 3 round scoring system, regardless of what each round looked like. Needs to change to accurately show who won fucking fight
You have 10 points to use. Change the rulining so that judges are allowed to use them. Hell treat it like school. The definition up there for a 10-8 would become a 10-5 (any less and it would take a tko) because the opponent failed. Then ramp it up 6 is a D- fighter got his ass kicked. 7 a C- guy did some stuff, but the other person clearly outclassed/damaged him. 8 B- Close round but it had a clear winner. 9 A- So close, but if I analyze it strictly I can see Josh had a bit of an edge so he gets 10 and Tim gets a 9.