first of all how the fcuk do you know punchstat numbers are correct? do you count every punch that lands? can you even TELL which punches actually landed and which hit the gloves or the arms? it's not like basketball where you can actually SEE the ball go in the hoop and you can count each field goal...or like runs in baseball. counting punches is virtually impossible and even if you count them, it still means NOTHING...that's why judges don't have compubox/punchstat numbers. punchstat is really just a couple of dudes siitting around the ring counting punches...it's not scientific....there's no controls for objectivity. there's no real technology involved to correct for human error and bias...it's bullschit! it's nothing more than a gimmick to make people think that more objective criteria is being used to determine the outcome....totally useless and misleading and worthless.
I agree but fans can be pretty selective. They will use compubox stats whenever they feel their fighter was robbed or to justify a blatant robbery.
At the end of the day, there have been more winners that had the higher punch stat numbers than the losers! You guys acting like every fight is rigged, punch stats are wrong and the loser actually won but, was screwed out of a win! It happens but, not every fight! Sometimes they get it right!
And that is actually what I am saying. I made two videos where I explain how we get up in arms and complain about possible corruption when it isn't necessarily the case. Did you see my first video were I explain how you can have a legitimately close fight and yet have wide scorecards?
He just explains that the fights are scored on a round by round basis. Compubox keeps round by round stats as well. Not sure where's the "compubox fallacy" here.
The fallacy is in the fact that you can have a higher punch count and still objectively lose the fight because we score on a round by round basis. I make this point because sometimes you have a fighter who should have lost a fight getting the desition but the broadcast team will use the compubox total to justify it
I really don't know why anyone puts any credence in punch stat numbers. As others have said, it is just people hitting a button so they may count a punch that was actually blocked or they may even miss a landed shot. Also, there is no differentiation for the power of shots landed. To use punch stats as the be all and end all when a full blooded shot is rated as equal as a half power, lazy shot, is to turn pro boxing into amatuer boxing.
Watch out for the house fighter and those compubox numbers. Some of those DLH fights were hard to digest. Plus, they never credit the opponent with much either. But seeing the house fighter being the guy screwed by compubox numbers are as rare as the amount of unfair/bad decisions the house fighters lose.
Yep! HBO for instance relies heavily on punchstats, and they totally harp on it as if it was the tell all of the fight only when it suits their agenda. .....as corrupt and bias as networks like HBO are to their house fighters, you're not going to convince me that HBO doesn't assign the trigger happy button pushers on their house fighters to count punches and place the more seasoned, more conservative, honest guy on the opponent. Then there is this matter that punchstats doesn't measure the intensity and quality of the shot landed. Jim Lampley has become an expert on being able to look at the punchstats offered to him, and explain away the numbers to suit their house fighter by picking and choosing what to harp on for that particular fight. It the network doesn't have dog in the fight, most of the time punchstats will portray an accurate account of the fight. In other words, the button pushers will do an honest job. ......but when there's a dog in the fight to be taken care of, there will also be hands to grease so that the network will be able to paint the picture they want to paint. Boxing's corruption just runs way deep, not just with the numerous alphabet groups, but onto the networks that that cover the sport and who have an interest that certain fighters signed with their network, succeed.
Don't get me started on "power punches" - anything besides a jab is a "power punch" even if it's a featherduster right hand. That being said, no one says compubox or punch stats are supposed to be the basis for scoring a fight. It just gives you some statistical data for discussion and a less objective way to look at a fight -- I'm sure it's more off for super-fast flyweights throwing 100 punches a round than one-at-a-time lumbering heavyweights, but either way it gives data.
It should be used the way you've described, but unfortunately networks like HBO manipulate the stats when it suits the agenda. "Compubox stats back our assertion of whats transpiring in the fight." Funny how we only hear that from Lampley when it suits their agenda. I think used honestly and unbiasedly, the punchstats can be a useful tool to point out trends in the fight, unfortunately for the most part, networks using them dont use it that way, so its really become a tool for these networks to attempt to cover up their own bias through dishonest means.
