In the parlance of the boxing ring, it was all down to points - no clear winner and no killer-blow delivered. Thursday night's US presidential debate in Miami was billed as crucial to the chances of Democratic contender, Senator John Kerry, of clawing back what appears to be the growing poll lead enjoyed by President Bush.
Early post-debate polls found a clear win on the night for Mr Kerry, and his good performance should create a new momentum in his campaign. But seasoned commentators suggest the exchange is more likely to energise the support bases of the two candidates than win new converts.
The first of the head-to-head debates was devoted to national security and foreign policy, and, in the event, Iraq inevitably dominated the 90-minute debate. In terms of tone, given the bitterness of both camps, the debate was surprisingly subdued; in terms of substance, however, it was the clearest, sharpest exposition yet of the fundamental differences between the two men - of character, of tactics, and of vision.
Mr Bush's recurring theme was his opponent's alleged inconsistency on the war and the difficulty he would have as commander-in-chief: "I don't see how you can lead this country to success in Iraq if you say wrong war, wrong time, wrong place. What message does that send our troops?" Mixed messages are a sign of weakness, an invitation to attack. Leadership requires clarity and certainty.
This goes to the heart of Mr Kerry's weakness in the campaign. His response was blunt, brief and among the most effective parries of the debate. "Maybe someone would call it a character trait, maybe somebody wouldn't," he responded. "But this issue of certainty. It's one thing to be certain, but you can be certain and be wrong."
America's friends abroad will welcome the Kerry commitment to and emphasis on multilateralism and building alliances, though they will probably be sceptical of his claim that where he leads they will follow, not least back into Iraq. Anxious to undermine the charge that he would cut and run, Mr Kerry insisted he sees US troops in the country "to win", but he was short on a specific alternative strategy.
Where he scored most strongly against the President was in his critique of the Bush rationale for war and lack of preparation for its aftermath, his analysis of the Saddam threat to the US, and his painting of the lost opportunity to deal decisively with Osama bin Laden.
With two more debates and 4½ weeks campaigning to go, both men now know they have a battle on their hands.