Why do all of you bring Compubox stats as valuable argument?

Compubox is not 100% accurate, but it averages out over the course of most fights to get close to the truth. But as someone said, you have to judge things round by round, total punches don't mean anything if you lost the 1st 6 rounds, but one the 2nd 6 rounds by landing a lot more, you could have a fight 250-150 in punches landed and have a draw. And Compubox is not used to score rounds, period. It can just give you a better picture for debate. You judge a fight with your eyes at full speed, not while playing it in slow mo, not while listening to the crowd, and not with Gifs. And thread was probably started because of Pac May, in the case of Pac vs May, the Compubox numbers actually told nearly the same story that the judges and 97% of the fans all saw with their eyes. It wasn't a close fight.

Maybe Pac just chose to fight that way? :thinking: And you still haven't recovered from Pacman ending Hatton's career :haha: Such a weak reply haha. I have never indicated once that I am a Hatton fan lmao. But we know you're a Pacquiao fan. Defending another ******* too lolol so funny. SALT

People sometimes act like it's some accurate system to determine a winner and loser. In reality in just one guy assigned to each fighter, pressing a button when he thinks the fighter lands or misses. Even then, every punch that isn't a jab is a 'power punch'. Regardless of if they are hurtful shots, or pitty-patter punches. I look at them as nothing but a fun graphic at the end of the fight. I'd never use it to help me score a fight.

facts about compu box people use them only when it suits them. Floyd fans use it to prove how he is accurate and hard to hit, fans of fighters who didnt win but landed more according to compubox will point out compubox to prove that their man won etc etc etc. Its just another tool in the boxing fan tool belt to use in an argument.

Compubox was proven to be inaccurate years ago. Why is this still being debated? But punches thrown should be somewhat accurate and when you see a high volume fighter reduced to half his output it is telling. Maybe Pac just chose to fight that way? :thinking: Awwww El Blanco had a bit of a torrid time dealing with Pacquiao's loss to Mayweather and because the Compubox was lopsided for Floyd he's venting some lingering pains here! Let it bleed homie, let it out.. come on.. let it bleed! And you still haven't recovered from Pacman ending Hatton's career :haha:

tell that to every person that uses.... You guessed it..... Punch stats to "prove" mayweather should have a loss on his record to jose luis castillo. compubox has it's flaws but and shouldn't be the sole foundation for any rationale as to who won a fight. But i've seen just as stupid arguments, if not worse ones. Like: "i score punches that do more damage... " so the guy who looks more worked over should be the loser, right? Until you see pacquiao's and clottey's faces after their fight and that goes right out of the window. Boxing is so subjective and even though there basic scoring criteria, people apply them according to their likes and dislikes. It's one of the great things and worst things about boxing. Gives us all something to flap our gums about. end thread//////

Tell that to every person that uses.... you guessed it..... punch stats to "prove" Mayweather should have a loss on his record to Jose Luis Castillo. Compubox has it's flaws but and shouldn't be the sole foundation for any rationale as to who won a fight. But I've seen just as stupid arguments, if not worse ones. Like: "I score punches that do more damage... " so the guy who looks more worked over should be the loser, right? Until you see Pacquiao's and Clottey's faces after their fight and that goes right out of the window. Boxing is so subjective and even though there basic scoring criteria, people apply them according to their likes and dislikes. It's one of the great things and worst things about boxing. Gives us all something to flap our gums about.

People credit it and discredits it to fit their agendas This. All comes down to whether it supports people's opinion or not. It's ridiculous. No one should ever need or use CompuBox to support their argument. If you do, maybe it's because you realize you're not quite sure about your stance.

Awwww El Blanco had a bit of a torrid time dealing with Pacquiao's loss to Mayweather and because the Compubox was lopsided for Floyd he's venting some lingering pains here! Let it bleed homie, let it out.. come on.. let it bleed!

Compubox was proven to be inaccurate years ago. Why is this still being debated? But punches thrown should be somewhat accurate and when you see a high volume fighter reduced to half his output it is telling.

Lol this is 100% true...I know I've done it before, not gonna front...when dude I'm supporting wins, I'm like, "check the compubox numbers homey, my dude outlanded your dude in 9 of 12 rounds"...but when it's the other way around, I be like "compubox is f**king inaccurate as f**k bro" :lol1: Sounds like daggums blueprint

LOL, there is no high technology behind compubox. There are two dudes, who count thrown and landed punches, one dude for one boxer. The only technology is that thay don't write it on paper, they push the buttons. But at the end it is the same old handed counting. I was wondering how long into this thread it would go, before someone mentions that fact. Green "K" homie!!!

the most frustrating thing is that people don't even question its accuracy which is often very far from reality. how can you just accept it as fact? and as someone else said not every punch is created equally so its just the dumbing down of trying to discuss boxing. its the last act of desperation when someone doesn't want to delve too deep into a fight.

They're supposed to supplement observations. If you notice that one fighter establishes the jab and used it to good effect in the rounds that he clearly won, it wouldn't hurt to cite the compubox no. You believe a fighter was outworked by his opponent, it wouldn't hurt to bring up the statistics for the match ups. I don't agree with forming arguments on compubox alone. We're not dealing with amateur boxing and the system is flawed. I roll my eyes when people form their arguments around the compubox stats. I do not have a problem with people reaching their own conclusions and referencing compubox sparingly.

They probably aren't that accurate but at least they might be neutral. Judges often score the fight for the name fighter who is in all the future network plans and against the unknown underdog who clearly won the fight. I thought Guerrero clearly lost a reasonably close fight but one judge had him winning 97 to 92 even though he clearly lost some rounds and was knocked down. Usually the punch count won't agree with the crooked judge. As you say the punch count is often way off from what I saw in the ring.

Saw that coming, a random insult like usual Lol am I really hurting your feelings? Here's a list of threads you're in; Floyd TBE Lara beats ggg Ward Mr.mayweather What happens in those threads? A circle jerk between all you groupies. Now why would I be serious in any of those threads that reak of patheticness? I get along with 90% of the posters and if you were an actual fan and went into other threads you'd see that. :bottle:

Do you do anything else on this site except talk **** to ppl? every time you post youre b1tching about something or acting like youre hot sh1t. srsly all you do is act like some badass I didnt say anything about compubox proving someone won, i just said it shows who lands more and who misses, nothing wrong about that. Inb4 some random keyboard insult :bottle: easy fanboy

close the thread. #ether!!!!!!!

back in my day ME and my fellow dudes used to score fights with our damn PUPILS!!!!! not no crappy computer animated software and robots!! this aint no game!!!! dont be a damn flibbitygibbet and watch the fight with your damn eyes that allah gave you what is the obsession with all this fancy ass technology!!!!!!!! LOL, there is no high technology behind compubox. There are two dudes, who count thrown and landed punches, one dude for one boxer. The only technology is that thay don't write it on paper, they push the buttons. But at the end it is the same old handed counting.

Even if Compubox is accurate, to use it in an argument would mean that every punch is worth the same. I never use it in my arguments, it's nonsense. It's cool to look at after the fight, but it's meaningless when trying to argue who won a fight Close the thread.