Do you believe Compubox is accurate?

I added some conclusions to the OP.

I never really think that there is anything malicious going on For certain fights, there definitely was. As an example in one fight. CompuBox credited a fighter with 232 connects, and HBO touted the number of connects during the broadcast. While post fight video analysis of the fight literally shows that boxer landed in the 40s and was outlanded by at least 2-1.

Talking about punches thrown yes Compubox in accurate, it's easy to see a punch thrown. On the contrary see a punch hit the target is not easy in many occasions. Thus as it regards the punches landed Compubox is not accurate Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

All these years watching fights and I really have no idea how these companies even define a landed punch. I'm sure there is a guideline, and that the Compubox folks are trained in the practice, but it seems to me that introducing another human into the equation just makes it as subjective as judging. The stats just show up on the screen and we're supposed to take them at face value. I never really think that there is anything malicious going on - it's just a system that has an inherent margin for error which should always be kept in mind. I pay no attention to them whatsoever as a fight is happening, and it plays no role into how I score a round/fight. I only find them halfway useful when looking for general trends in output for a certain fighter. (as far as the fight in question....I am with Pac fans who think he landed the better punches in the fight, and that it was more competitive than many lead on..... but it's still 116-112 Floyd. Easy fight to score) also, Daggum's Compuclinch>Compubox

:lol1::lol1::lol1: #FloydRuinsLives It's crazy may 2nd is the past. I never seen nothing like this before.

Compu Box is atrocious. One of the more comical ones was from Forrest vs Mayorga II. Lampley stated that through four rounds CompuBox had Mayorga landing 40 power punches. Did Mayorga even land 15 clean shots period through four rounds?

Then just download and watch the fight for yourself. You can put it in slow motion in any video player. Make your own punch count. Then you'll see it. You are actually believing in compubox which is not good man, but it's ok. I don't think it's 100% accurate, I just don't believe it's as wildly inaccurate as you say it is, for instance I found it hard to believe when shobox said Wilder landed more punches than Spzilka, in fact I don't believe he did at least not from what I saw. I didn't believe it when they said Pacquaio out landed Marquez in the third fight either. But majority of the time I believe it is right and May-Pac was one of the times I thought it was right.

I mean bradley was given a much more questionable decision and pac fans moved past that. Video Analysis of that fight actually doesn't support a robbery.

I'm just making this poll to find out how credible Compubox is to you. Please vote. Numerous post fight video analyses, show CompuBox to be totally inaccurate.

I have seen those videos that spoon posted and you expect me to go with an edited slow motion video by a Pacquaio fan over watching the actual fight, your daily mail article claims compubox credited Floyd with 80 punches that he never landed. Why is there not a bigger investigation into this??..... why didn't any of the reputable boxing sites post this or does Floyd own them all, I thought he only owned fighthype? I'm done with this, my apologies for calling your post low... maybe I can't see what you're seeing, doesn't seem like many can. The majority aren't always right so I'll give you that in regards to your suspicions. Then just download and watch the fight for yourself. You can put it in slow motion in any video player. Make your own punch count. Then you'll see it. You are actually believing in compubox which is not good man, but it's ok.

I'm not saying that compubox is accurate and I'm not even saying slowmo doesn't have it's merit...but seriously, has there ever been a fan base who's refused to let go of a situation like this. I mean bradley was given a much more questionable decision and pac fans moved past that. Is it because the majority of people agreed that pac should have won that fight? It's ok for your guy to lose a close fight...just because floyd is the villain here, doesn't mean it's necessary to have a never ending crusade to sway people's opinion.

You think it's low? you think it's impossible? then just watch the fucking video and see for yourself how inaccurate it was and how Pacquiao outlanded Mayweather. I have seen those videos that spoon posted and you expect me to go with an edited slow motion video by a Pacquaio fan over watching the actual fight, your daily mail article claims compubox credited Floyd with 80 punches that he never landed. Why is there not a bigger investigation into this??..... why didn't any of the reputable boxing sites post this or does Floyd own them all, I thought he only owned fighthype? I'm done with this, my apologies for calling your post low... maybe I can't see what you're seeing, doesn't seem like many can. The majority aren't always right so I'll give you that in regards to your suspicions.

You think it's low? you think it's impossible? then just watch the fucking video and see for yourself how inaccurate it was and how Pacquiao outlanded Mayweather. :lol1::lol1::lol1: #FloydRuinsLives

This is pretty low man, if compubox was THIS inaccurate in the biggest ever boxing event then surely surely surellllyyyyy there would have been a lot more than just one article on the daily mail of all places loooool. This is low, I don't know how you thought you were making sense when you typed out that farcical post. You just love conspiracy theories it seems. You think it's low? you think it's impossible? then just watch the fucking video and see for yourself how inaccurate it was and how Pacquiao outlanded Mayweather.

Real stats: Mayweather - landed 68 out of 471 (14.4% accuracy) Pacquiao - landed 98 out of 414 (23,5% accuracy) Not only Pacquiao outlanded him, but also defended better. There's a good article in the Dailymail that explains the whole situation. Any fair analysis made to the replay of the fight showed that Pacquiao outlanded Floyd clearly. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-3077424/The-punch-statistics-prove-Floyd-Mayweather-fortunate-beat-Manny-Pacquiao-unanimous-decision.html This is pretty low man, if compubox was THIS inaccurate in the biggest ever boxing event then surely surely surellllyyyyy there would have been a lot more than just one article on the daily mail of all places loooool. This is low, I don't know how you thought you were making sense when you typed out that farcical post. You just love conspiracy theories it seems.

I'm quite sure it's more accurate than the great majority of the people who post here. And wtf does a retired fighter have to do with it?

I don't see a reason why it can't be accurate. Why don't they have 3 guys mashing buttons and then compare notes after the fight and take the average? Or why not do a review using replays after the fight?

Slow motion is slow motion. If you want to test the accuracy of a system that claims to count landed punches, then slowing down exchanges is the best way to do it. I don't see how anything that gives you a truer picture of events is bad. Real stats: Mayweather - landed 68 out of 471 (14.4% accuracy) Pacquiao - landed 98 out of 414 (23,5% accuracy) Not only Pacquiao outlanded him, but also defended better. There's a good article in the Dailymail that explains the whole situation. Any fair analysis made to the replay of the fight showed that Pacquiao outlanded Floyd clearly. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-3077424/The-punch-statistics-prove-Floyd-Mayweather-fortunate-beat-Manny-Pacquiao-unanimous-decision.html

its 100 percent accurate. don't question compubox. don't' question anything in fact :lol1: :lol1:

its 100 percent accurate. don't question compubox. don't' question anything in fact