Why Two 114–113 Cards in Ruiz–Knyba Drew Criticism
The Ruiz–Knyba controversy centered on two narrow 114–113 cards. Here is what the totals establish—and what the scorecard math only suggests.
Damian Knyba officially beat Andy Ruiz Jr. by unanimous decision on September 4, 2026, at the Prudential Center in Newark, New Jersey. Published criticism centered less on the winner than on how close two judges made the fight.
The New Jersey State Athletic Control Board’s official results record these totals:
| Judge | Ruiz | Knyba | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|
| Glenn Feldman | 113 | 114 | Knyba by 1 |
| Anthony Lundy | 110 | 117 | Knyba by 7 |
| Kevin Morgan | 113 | 114 | Knyba by 1 |
All three judges selected Knyba, so the result was a unanimous decision. The controversy arose from the seven-point spread between Lundy’s margin and the one-point margins returned by Feldman and Morgan.
What 114–113 suggests—but does not prove
New Jersey uses three judges and requires them to score every round. The round winner receives 10 points and the loser nine or fewer; the boxer with the higher total on a majority of cards wins the decision (N.J. Admin. Code § 13:46-8.19).
Knyba dropped and badly hurt Ruiz in round seven. If each judge scored that round 10–8 to Knyba, scored every other round 10–9 and applied no deductions, a 114–113 card reconstructs like this:
- Six rounds to Knyba, including the 10–8 seventh
- Six rounds to Ruiz, all scored 10–9
- Final total: Knyba 114, Ruiz 113
Under the same assumptions, Lundy’s 117–110 represents nine rounds for Knyba and three for Ruiz.
That is the conventional reconstruction used in much of the reaction to the cards. It should not be mistaken for the published round-by-round scorecards, however. The commission result lists only the final totals. New Jersey’s rule also connects 10–9, 10–8 and 10–7 scores to the degree of superiority in a round; it does not state that every knockdown automatically produces a 10–8. Without the individual cards, the precise round allocation cannot be established from the totals alone.
Why the close cards drew criticism
The conditional six-rounds-apiece reading looked difficult to reconcile with two published live cards. Bad Left Hook scored the fight 118–109, awarding Ruiz only rounds eight and nine. Yahoo Sports’ live card finished 116–111, with Ruiz taking rounds five, eight, nine and 12. Both accounts described Knyba using his jab and range while Ruiz struggled to produce sustained offense.
Those media cards are opinions, not proof that an official judge scored improperly. They do explain the backlash: two observers differed over some rounds but both saw a clear Knyba win, while Feldman and Morgan produced the narrowest possible winning margin.
Knyba shared that concern. After the bout, he said, “I definitely thought I won more rounds than that,” according to The Ring.
The majority-draw calculation is a counterfactual
On the usual 10–8 reconstruction, the knockdown accounts for Knyba’s extra point on both 114–113 cards. Change only the seventh from 10–8 to 10–9 and each close card becomes 114–114. Lundy would still have Knyba ahead, producing a majority draw: two even cards and one Knyba card.
That is useful scorecard arithmetic, but it does not describe an alternative fight that actually occurred. Remove the knockdown and the judges might assess the seventh differently; the rest of the bout could also unfold differently. The calculation shows how much the official result depended on that one scoring event under the conventional reconstruction—not that the knockdown was scored wrongly.
A one-point final margin can also be misleading. To flip a 114–113 card by changing one ordinary 10–9 round, a judge would move that round from Knyba to Ruiz, creating a two-point swing and a 113–114 Ruiz card.
Why a wide-looking fight can produce a close total
Judges do not issue one score for the full 36 minutes. They score 12 separate rounds and add them. A narrow 10–9 round has the same numerical value as a clearly controlled 10–9 round, which can compress a fight that looked one-sided overall into a close total. That distinction is explored further in why a scorecard can be close when a fight looks one-sided.
Punch totals alone would not resolve the disagreement. The proper question is which boxer won each round under the applicable criteria—not who accumulated the better-looking overall performance. Here, the official totals establish agreement on Knyba as the winner but substantial disagreement over his margin.
The referee dispute was separate
Knyba also objected to referee David Franciosi’s handling of the seventh-round knockdown. The Ring reported that Ruiz went down with 34 seconds left, stood with 28 seconds remaining and did not resume fighting until 11 seconds remained. Knyba said the count took too long and that the contest should have been stopped.
New Jersey requires a knocked-down boxer to take a full count of eight before resuming (N.J. Admin. Code § 13:46-8.10). Its rules also allow the referee or ringside physician to stop a bout when a boxer appears to be in physical danger (N.J. Admin. Code § 13:46-8.14). The elapsed broadcast time supports scrutiny of the sequence, but it does not by itself establish that Franciosi violated either rule.
That complaint concerns the count and the decision to let Ruiz continue. The scorecard controversy concerns how Feldman and Morgan reached 114–113. They are related to the same seventh-round sequence, but they are analytically separate.
The supported conclusion is narrower than the loudest reaction: Knyba was the unanimous official winner, while two one-point cards were much closer than multiple published ringside assessments and Knyba himself believed the fight warranted.