Punch Stats
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Joined
·
16,419 Posts
Bradley couldnt hit shit. Look @ them disgraceful percentages. #noaccuracydisgrace :deal
Joined
·
14,188 Posts
Not to mention the way he was backing up all night and getting hurt whenever he got hit clean. Man, he just dominated that fight with ring generalshipness/being negative.
Joined
·
1,913 Posts
Compubox is crap. Some guys just pressing a button when they believe a punch has landed. It also said Tony Thompson landed more punches on Wladimir. Yeah right.
Joined
·
23,540 Posts
Bradleys numbers were awful, how the hell did he get the nod.
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
Compubox gets it right more than the judges do.
Joined
·
1,913 Posts
How do you know? Do you count every punch thrown/landed and compare? They press a button when a punch is thrown and then someone presses a button when they believe a punch has landed. Just like judges, they are using their eyes and have no replay, yet some (Jim Lampley) treat it as gospel.
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
It's not gospel but their stats showed Rigo beating Williams, Kotelnik beating Alexander and Lewis beating Holyfield. Much better that what the judges decided for those fights.
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
That's true as they don't distinguish how hurtful a landed punch is but they are not influenced by "aggression" "showboating" or any preconceived notion on who should win the fight beforehand. I think judges should be be able to see the stats and make up there own mind.
I have more faith in them than judges cards these days. Woodhouse 115 Gavin 114, Vasquez 115 Doniare 112, Mayweather 118 Cotto 112. Every week there are baffling cards coming back from the judges.
Joined
·
21,884 Posts
Aye but the thing is, even if they are accurate (which is no more guaranteed than the cards imo) they don't show a true representation of who won the fight. I don't score on punches landed, that's amateur boxing. There's far more to it than that.
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
Aye but this is part of the problem. Everyone has there own method for scoring which leads to such disparity. My own way is I pick who I would rather have been in the round and I break the round down to minutes. I do side with the aggressor in tight rounds but that's just me. At least Compubox is consistent. Do you ever rewatch a fight and score a round differently? I know I do!
Joined
·
21,884 Posts
That's a great shout, gonna try out thinking that way when scoring.
I find the breaking rounds into minutes doesn't really work. Say Bradley was edging the round yet not landing much convincingly for 2 minutes then Pac dominated and landed some sweet shots for 1 minute. That's a Pac round for me and might be how we got that robbery the other night.
I'm not a big fan of scoring aggression in tight rounds, the thing for me is it has to be effective aggression. I mean if they're being the aggressor and the other fighter is running and doing fuck all I'll score that but otherwise I'm not a big fan of scoring on who's going forwards.
I don't think compubox is very consistent though, that's an illusion. It's as fallible as the judges. Essentially compubox is just 3 judges scoring based on amateur rules (ie. counting punches and pressing a button) and you get plenty of robberies in the ams!
I definitely score rounds differently when I rewatch the fight! I remember one round in Duran-Leonard 1 when I rescored it I couldn't believe my original card!
Shit, sorry, bit of a long rambling post there! You just gave me a lot to think about:lol:
Joined
·
3,006 Posts
Ramble at your pleasure mate:yep:good
Well I give a lot of weight of how convincing the action was in the minute. A dominant last minute beats slight advantage over 2 in my wee scoring world:yep
I'm not saying to score the fight only on Compubox but i think the judges should see the numbers. I think it's a bit unfair comparing them to amateur scoring. Apart from the Klit v Thompson fight, I cannot recall them ever being far off unlike the ams which churn out abysmal scorecards all the time.
In fact we have a head to head comparison between Compubox and Am scoring when Jones Jr was in the Olympics.
CompuBox Punch Stats
First Round
Jones: 20 of 85
Park: 3 of 38
Second Round
Jones: 30 of 98
Park: 15 of 71
Third Round
Jones: 36 of 120
Park: 14 of 79
Total
Jones: 86 of 303
Park: 32 of 188
I don't know what they're exact method is but it's clearly way more advanced and accurate than how they do it in the Ams!
Joined
·
21,884 Posts
Great stats there. Real interesting.
I really don't think judges should be given the punch stats though. If they can't judge without them then they shouldn't be judges. Pac-Marquez 3 is the obvious example here. The punch stats had it way in Pac's favour but every man and his dog knows that's a robbery.
Joined
·
15,473 Posts
CompuLie stats are completely forged. They started it a couple of years back, ironically around Pac/JMMII time, although the Hopkins/Calz stats were funny too. The CompuLie/Liederman collaboration was most evident during Alexander-Kotelnik, then Pac/JMMIII was all over the place, Marquez easily landed significantly more. Based on my pair of eyes and 1-2000 fight experience I'd say Pac was nearly as ineffective as Brad, sometimes highly inactive, still he won the fight, just not by the margins CompuLie and screaming HBO commentators would suggest. This was a very highly competitive fight and a good one actually. The rematch is warranted.
Joined
·
1,913 Posts
Lampleys obsession with Compubox drives me fucking nuts. The whole fight, to him it seems, depends on what that fucking compubox says.
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
