Alan, I agree with you Kieran put up a really good performance (as I said in my earlier post). He deserves credit for taking the fight to Danthai and making a fight of it. You should be proud of your brother; which I am sure you are. Danthai is certainly a highly ranked Thai, better than many and on a level with some of the best Thais we have had fighting in the UK in recent years. I am not sure it was close enough for the WBC to offer a rematch in the near future but if they do then that would be brilliant. As I have stated before on many occasions, I really like Kieran and really want him to do well on the international stage. I hope he learns from this fight and if he gets a rematch uses the knowledge gained to win next time.

Given what I have stated above, I hope you see the following statement for what it is, purely an observation on scoring and not a reflection on Kieran or his performance.

Alan, I agree with all you said about what the WBC state their policies are on scoring (very similar to what the Thai Boxing Board of Sport also state). However, I am interested in your opinion on what criteria you think was applied by the three WBC judges in scoring this fight. I personally think they were all very good MuayThai judges and applied appropriate criteria in keeping with the spirit of MuayThai. However, surely if it had been scored as you suggest it should have beeen, the judge’s scoring would also have been as close as you suggest it was. The three judges were very consistent in their decision (one boxer won by a very large margin). Surely for judges to give the margin of victory they did they would have to have been scoring it by Muay Thai (Thailand) scoring criteria (although perhaps not weighting rounds). Had that fight happened on a temple show in one of Thailand’s provinces or in any of Thailand’s stadiums, that fight would have been scored exactly the same way; a big win to Danthai. This doesn’t mean Kieran got battered or badly hurt, it just means the fighting style Danthai used was appropriate for the scoring criteria applied; predominately teeping Kieran off balance, kicking the body, kneeing the body and trying to maintain physical and mental composure when Kieran punched and elbowed.

I said in my earlier post that I was pleased that the fight was scored using MuayThai criteria. I didn’t say this because it meant that Kieran lost the fight, but rather because I believe that type of scoring ensures the skill development of international fighters and because I know it is far superior in obtaining consistent decisions than the alternatives available. I am not just basing this consistency argument on anecdotal evidence (of which there is plenty) but I do have research evidence to support the consistency of MuayThai scoring (as used in Thailand) when compared to the type of scoring that is generally used in the UK. This research has not been published yet and when it is I will present it on ax. However, I can provide a brief overview of the results. The results suggest across 135 judgement decisions that there was a 75% level of agreement (mean difference between scores 2.38) between UK judges. Compared to a 91% level of agreement (mean difference between scores 0.31) between judges using Thai stadium style scoring. The only differences in judgement decisions by judges using MuayThai scoring (Thailand style) was in drawn bouts (then only one pint difference). I would suggest that this level of consistency in a subjectively judged sport is unique. I would also suggest this means we should be very careful before we discard a system that offers this level of agreement; particularly for a system that is far inferior in terms of the reliability of decisions and also the variety of skills required to win.

PS. I though your other lads fighting on the show fought well; particularly the shorter fighter who stopped the tall lad with punches (I didn't have a programme so am not sure of his name).