So what is so wrong about fights and rounds being scored even?  I know I've seen fights where a draw was (or would have been) a very fair decision.  If the result is unsatisfactory, there can always be a rematch to distinguish who is the better fighter.  Football and Hockey used to have ties.  Paying fans wanted more conclusive results so they invoked overtime to separate the winners from losers.  That doesn't change the fact that the game was even when the regulation time expired.  Occasionally an extra tie breaking round has been tried for boxing, but since boxing is unique it isn't practical or fair to the participants, who are usually removing their gloves and tape as soon as the fight ends.

   Even rounds are also a reality.  Sometimes during an opening round almost nothing of note occurs.  Other times a round will be so frantic it is impossible to distinguish who won without a review.  If you force a judge to pick he'll do one of three things.  He'll pick which fighter he prefers, or he'll pick the hometown fighter, taking the safer route.  Or he might just guess.  This isn't the way boxing matches should be decided.  What ends up happening is that a round with little to choose from becomes the same score as a decisive round that had no knockdown.  Could you imagine if in baseball they had to score innings which no runners crossed the plate?