How reliable is compubox?

Koki Kameda

 

:hat

 

complete and utter ****

looking at mayweather-DLH as an example you can see the system is HORRIBLY flawed and biased. in that case, genaro hernandez who i normally respect, is one of the operators. he fought both fighters and had a pretty obvious distain for Oscar and picked mayweather to win. the punch stats for that fight were ridiculous. *NOTE: mayweather won, not disputing this. if someone who is supposed to objectively judge a fight in some way makes a public prediction, he loses validity.

bottom line, compubox is as accurate as any two of us sitting in our living rooms

 

welcome to east side!:thumbsup

 

He'll never fit in... too much common sense.

JK, keep it up guy.

 

Sometimes it works and sometimes it don't. The only real stat you can almost trust is the total punches thrown. That one keeps the decision making down to a minimum and they don't have to see as much. So it may be safe to say punch stats can tell you who was the busier fighter.

 

It's as accurate as any other system in my view.

The problem is most people can't score round by round, they score the entire fight which is why you get so many dickheads claiming robbery in cases where one guy landed clean, but not many and the other guy landed a tonne of glancing blows (i.e Hopkins vs Calzaghe)

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

EDIT:**** I thought you were talking about guys missing or seeing punches that arent or are there

 

Me personally dont think it is reliable

 

great point pugilistic! for instance, if fighter a lands 3 decent shots in the first ten rounds but 200 punches in the last two rounds and fighter b, lands 10 or 12 good shots a round for the first ten but gets DOMINATED in the last two fighter a still loses a landslide decision. punch stats will show fighter a landing more but it doesn't matter

 

wow.. I had a flash back to high school with the teacher asking how long it takes a train to travel from A to B:yep

 

It's the reason why high stamina fighters with a good chin are so hard to beat, because they'll keep going round after round after round and make it impossible for the other guy to take breaks.

It's why I'm an advocate of open scoring, too... I'd have every round shown on TV (not announced in crowd, etc) in terms of what it was scored so you can see what rounds are awarded to fighters as the fight goes.

If boxing wants to clean itself up and ensure corruption is removed, open scoring is it's only option.