Why do we needed judges when we have compu box?

+1

:bbb

 

Compubox isn't subtle enough, but I do think that the round-by-round scoring system has enormous problems and is the reason for so many seemingly strange decisions.

Froch, on a round-by-round basis, beat Dirrell. However, the feeling after the fight was that Dirrell was by far the superior boxer, which means that the scoring system is badly flawed.

 

Compubox is a bunch of guys pressing buttons so I don't really know how they came up with the name.
I hope it never has anything to do with the outcome of a bout...it's just about bareable when you see the stats at the end of a bout. Guys pressing buttons who have most likely never stepped in the ring before...know nothing about the sport, but they get the job because they wear a suit. This is the reason why the amateurs is so corrupt, punches can land on arms and a person will get a point...just because it lands, doesn't mean it is an effective punch.

 

Compu box is just as subjective as judging a fight. However, compu box is largely irrelevant to scoring. A round is not won solely on the number of connects landed. It also has to do with the strength of those shots and who controlled the action.

Think about it like this, one David Tua left hook can be worth a whole round of jabs from John Ruiz!

 

+1...No, wait. +100. Also, I crap on Compubox.

 

See I don't understand why you are trying to belittle the technology. I'm not suggesting compubox is the be-all-and-end-all of scoring a fight, but it does have its usefulness as one part of the picture.

Of course they aren't going to get it 100% right - it's limited by human errors, however they are accurate enough for people to get a basic picture of who is throwing what type of punches and the accuracy. I also don't mind punchzone as well.

It's no different than the use of stats in other professional sports. Shall we ban HD broadcasts as well? It sounds like you are against progress and technology altogether.

 

i remember one of the idiots here i think auracle or some other fool saying he thought mike jones beat soto karass because he threw and landed more punches.


thats the kind of stupidity the compubox brings.

 

Men Lie, Women lie...which also means compubox lies.

 

wooooooooow...just.wow

what a horrible thread to start the morning to.

 

Once again I didn't realize that this was an old thread. Not only that, but I also didn't realize that I had already posted on this thread just 6 posts up...atsch

Oh well, not as bad as this crappy thread subject.

 

Compubox doesn't show who won on what round. A guy can have 150 punches landed in one round and and then throw 10 punches (landed) on the rest of the rounds. That is 260 punches landed the whole fight. His opponent then lands 20 punches per round or a total of 240 punches landed total, 20 less total punches landed than his opponent. Who will win more rounds though? Of course the guy with 20 punches landed per round.

 

And you have to remember that the compu box is been operate by persons, so the human factor still there, what weneed is better judges and we have to understend that they don't c the fight like we do, everyone of them have look to the fight from diffrent angles, still robberies should not b allow it.

 

I'm bumping this thread for no apparent reason whatsoever.

 

pacquiao threw a lot of punches off balance. they were shitty arm punches that wouldnt hurt a fly. marquez on the other hand was throwing bombs.