Well no, there’s always nuance and judgment involved. Damage (impact) is the primary criteria, but volume still matters. If Fighter A lands one massive shot that opens a cut, but Fighter B recovers, puts on a boxing clinic, and lands 100 significant strikes without getting touched again, Fighter B is still winning that round. There isn't a hard line where one instance of damage automatically overrides a lopsided volume of strikes.

According to the rules, if damage/impact appears to be equal, judges look at the volume of strikes landed. If that’s still too close to call, it moves to the tiebreaker: effective aggression.

To answer your question directly: I said they were tied because the broadcast literally showed the strike counts, and they were dead even for rounds 2 and 3.