Are compuBox statistics deceiving?

yes.

it is prone to human error as with everything

2 men sitting at a computer watching a monitor pushing buttons

 

there not aiming to decieve anyone.

so they are good to access things. But you have to take into account human error.

And it doesn't take into account how clean the punch landed or how powerfull

 

they're the poorest reflection of a fight and are so blatantly misused to misrepresent the facts in an effort to support someone's subjective opinion and bias

 

Quality over quantity and they don't measure quality.

 

Doesn't matter if it's prone to human error or off by a little. It's a close estimate. It doesn't need to be exact to be effective.

 

CompuBox stats are often completely fraudulent, when video of a fight is analyzed. Video analysis of fights like Calzaghe vs Hopkins, and Mayorga vs Forrest II, show that there is an agenda, and it isn't accurate punch statistics. Pacquaio vs Bradley is another fight where video analysis shows the connects for one fighter to be way off off. In that fight, Pacquaio's connects were over stated by around 100 punches.

In Forrest vs Mayorga II, Lampley stated that CompuBox had Mayorga landing 40 power shots through four rounds. Mayorga hadn't landed 15 clean scoring punches through four rounds.

In Calzaghe vs Hopkins, CompuBox had the Welshmen landing 232 punches. Under video analysis Calzaghe landed around 50 punches.

 

When people have fast hands its impossible to count every punch that landed properly, especially when combo's are thrown i think the compubox people just guess every one landed if alot of punches are thrown in a row

 

if by deceiving u mean full of ****...yes.

justification for my answer: because i said so.

 

If you watch a fight in slow motion, you'll see Compubox for the most part is accurate to within 2-3 punches per round given the angles the camera will allow me to see.

 

True, but the problem is that people use compubox to justify a persons win. People who dont watch the fight usually use this.

 

So they should get rid of CompuBox and not give us a statistical picture at all?

atsch

 

Well the Compubox counters are ringside like the judges. So are they more accurate than Judges who have to concentrate on more thing during the fight?

Counters just have to concentrate on one boxer and count his punches. Imo they mostly get it right

 

Yes! Compubox stats are not necessarily accurate. They are registered by a guy sitting at ringside who is under pressure, and who doesn't have the luxury of slow motion replays before posting his stats. Inevitably, these guys make mistakes.

I've watched several fights in slow motion, after realizing that the normal playback speed doesn't enable me to tell -- beyond a shadow of a doubt -- if certain punches land, graze, or miss their target altogether. Remember: we can't always count on the percussive snapping sound to know if the punch landed. That's because the boxers tend to be experts at discharging their out-breathing (sudden discharge of air through the nostrils) when they punch. The percussive, slapping sounds we hear are often no more than a guy's violent discharge of breath while punching.

In studying the slow motion playbacks, I have come across several instances in which my stats don't match those of the compubox guys. I trust my stats.

So, Compubox is simply not the penultimate authority that they make themselves out to be.

 

Only place that 'matters' is in message board world. It's not used in judging. It's basically a novelty.