The official Mayweather vs. Pacquiao aftermath trash receptacle

How about crippling an old man while speeding in his sports car, driving him out of work and sending him on a downward spiral of depression & alcoholism which eventually lead to his death?

 

So in Pac Bradley 1, Pacquiao landed 94 more punches, and that was close?

And in Mayweather Pacquiao, Floyd landed only 67 more punches, and that was a domination?

If that is your argument, then you are proving my point that punch stats clearly don't indicate whether a fight is close or a domination.

And if they don't matter, fine, but we heard a lot about how Floyd landed so many more punches than Manny, and how that's why he dominated. When you put that logic up against Pac Bradley 1 it's all wrong.

I could say "you had Pacquiao winning a close fight, but look at those punch stat numbers...Pacquiao landed almost 100 more punches. he dominated, blah blah blah."

Lets at least put to rest the fact that the official compu box numbers don't prove anything! They are simply real-time guesses by two different people. It's not scientific, so lets not treat compu box as such.

 

I'm about to watch it in slow motion. However, after rewatching 3 times... my scorecard is this. Keep in mind I scored it 118-110 for Mayweather first time I watched it.

RD1- Mayweather (clearly, lol. Though for both, it was quite defensive. Still, it Mayweather controlled the pace.)
RD2- Pacquiao (for me it's quite clear. Pacquiao landed the actual power punches, controlled the pace this round, and even if his aggressiveness wasn't effective the entire time, Mayweather wasn't landing anything hence, Pacquiao rd)
RD3- Pacquiao
RD4- Pacquiao
RD5- Mayweather
RD6- REALLY close, but I give it to Mayweather. I can see it going to anyone though
RD7- Pacquiao, (he landed two straight lefts hand square on the chin? I mean, come on? Two brilliant counters while most of Floyd's shot were either blocked or slipped.)
RD8- Mayweather
RD9- Draw
RD10- Draw
RD11- Mayweather
RD12- Mayweather (this one was dangerous. He did enough work early in the 12 rd to secure it and ran a lot later, but Pacquiao wasn't able to capitalize with Floyd's excessive movement past the 12th round's midway point, so I still give it to him.)

So, result?

114-116 Mayweather

ONCE AGAIN, I feel the world got sucked into the Mayweather Facade. An opponent, even Pacquiao, must do something SPECIAL to win the round. If he doesn't HURT Mayweather, if he doesn't get him to the ropes and throw a brilliant 14 punch combination, he'll lose the round. Mayweather could prance around and only throw a jab that doesn't land...and if Pacquiao doesn't do something special, they'll give it to Mayweather. It's absolutely ridiculous.

Pacquiao sat there and boxed Mayweather. He sat in front of him and boxed him, countered him, and was very defensive.

People were expecting a bat out of hell and because Pacquiao didn't do that, they thought Mayweather was schooling him. It's an illusion. Mosley, Lomachenko, Holyfield, etc weren't falling for it.

If you go back and read the play-by-play on some Greats' twitters i.e. Forman, Tyson, etc... you'll even see most have them to the wire up all the way up to the championship rounds! They're not looking at it as give Mayweather the rounds if Pacquiao doesn't do something special. They're looking at it as two boxers simply boxing.

It's all a matter of perspective.

 

TWO WEEKS ALREADY! quit your crying FFS

 

Compubox are just two guys pressing a buttons!!!!

I thought compubox was a chip placed in the gloves used to calculate missed, landed punches and then the force to determine what kind of punch it was. It makes sense. We for certain have the technology for it.

However, I didn't know we still lived in the dark ages. I was in horror when I found it was men. I didn't want to believe it because of how inaccurate that sounds. Men can't be trusted. Computers don't take bribes or lie. Boxing needs to evolve.

 

:-((

 

How about 50x the speed? :think

 

[YT]BNpj03sZkic[/YT]

 

I honestly don't see why people are still so fixated on this fight. It's been 2 weeks and it was a dull ****ing fight.

I would not watch it again. I watched it twice and that's it, never again.

We've had

Chocolatito vs Sosa
Kirkland/Canelo
Gennady/Monroe
Kameda/McDonnell
Tapia/Soro
Uchiyama/Chuwatana

They were all better fights than the "Super fight" we got.

I'd understand if it was an aesthetically pleasing fight to watch..... but news flash

IT WASN'T. It was boring as hell.

 

Oh, yes, I was caught up in the hype during the fight. Reason why I re-watch fights after. Live, I thought Pacquiao won only two rounds. Hearing the commentators, seeing Pacquiao not do what I wanted him to do... bad combination.

And perfect. It's good no one would score it for Pacquiao because he didn't win. 117-111 is far too wide and a draw is far too close.

 

What purpose is there to give us a "general idea of the shape of a contest"? Are we not capable of simply watching a fight and determining our own shape of the fight on our own?

Explain me this, what was the general shape of Pacquiao vs Bradley 1? Compu box said Bradley missed 81% of his punches. 81% of what Bradley threw missed but it was a close fight that he won on the cards? 81 % sounds to me like he was swinging at air in 4 out of every 5 punches and hit the lottery every 5 punches he threw. It's completely ridiculous to me how punch stats can be so wrong yet still generally accepted as something we should pay attention to during fights.

I don't think you realize how much controversy and confusion this creates. Trust me, boxing is much more enjoyabe when you don't think about numbers, you just watch and score the round. After if you watch it again you can give your reasons as to why you think someone won a round. Thinking about numbers landed occupies your brain, at that time you can't be worried about scoring a round. I think punch stats have become a major problem in boxing. I am all for punch stats being presented a few days after a fight as statistical tool, but only when the real-time guesswork can be eliminated, and only after a fight is complete. Similarly how people don't like open scoring, it can affect many aspects of a fight, for the same reason I don't like open punch-stats so to speak. It's not amateur fighting, let the pro judges do their job, and let the fighters work in the ring speak for itself. Don't dilute the sweet science by stupid punch stats that are highly erroneous and mis-leading.

When watching a fight for the first time, less information is more. Less biased commentary, less real-time punch stat updates for us to think about. That stuff takes away much of the excitement surrounding decisions. Why even concern yourself with how many punches land during a round? If you are a student of the sweet science, you don't need a single punch stat to figure out who won a round. I can determine the shape of a boxing fight on my own. I don't need compubox operators to do that.

Another note is that compubox is inherently different than other sport stats. It's not something like Corner kicks in soccer or first downs in football. Those things are not guesswork like counting real-time landed punches are in boxing. Do we even know who these punch stat operators are? Do they sit and track ringside next to the judges or are they in the studio watching the fight on TV?