A Study: PBC puts on better (less predictable) bouts than HBO

I'm hardly a expert on the setting up of a line & its progression, but the general opinion I have is the line we see on fight night is a reflection of what fans expect to go down. And while hype, image & venue can all come into play with the line I think its still the best representation of how competitive a fight will or won't be in the minds of fans. Yea sportsbooks will come up with opening lines that are based on legit chances for an outcome to happen + expectations based on other factors. Like for an easy & often used example would be when popular UK fighters fight in the UK (where online betting is all over the place & fairly mainstream it seems) the lines always seem a lil wider for that popular UK fighter than maybe they should be. But also the betting public alters the line as we get closer to fight time so "bad lines" tend to get exploited & corrected to line up more with the public perception. I believe there are sites like that, but I don't frequent them so Idk them off hand to direct you to them. Thanks man, I might use betting odds then and compare them to the final results. I'm thinking of doing this type of analyses for promoters at some point in the future. I think it might be interesting to get a ranking of GPB, TR, Hearn, Haymon etc.

Props to the OP for his efforts in putting this info together. Good stuff.

Was Porter the dog vs Broner? But yea not surprised by the results & respect for putting in the time to come up with them. And randomly as a avid combat sports bettor who follows the lines if you really wanna see the wideness of competition between HBO & PBC fights dig up the betting lines for all those fights & come up with the average betting line. I'm sure HBO's fights are probably in the -2000 (which is like saying a guy is 95% to win) or higher favorite range far more often than anyone enjoys seeing & definitely way more often than PBC. A few HBO fights on that list I specifically remember being in the -5000 range (which is like saying a guy is 98% to win). And the betting line is a solid take on the perception of fans of the competitiveness of a fight. Porter was definitely listed as the B-side in the promotional material. I think he was also regarded as the underdog by fans as he had only had one fight since he lost to Brook - and that was a pretty bad performance against Bone. 10% better is definitely justification lol wtf. Or 12% actually which is what it was. A legit thing to take issue with is the sample size as we are only looking at the data for a total of 52 fights. So if a mere 3 more favorites have won on the PBC side there is nothing to discuss here. That's why I mentioned the betting odds cuz I bet all the time & see lines all the time & HBO's fights have had some of the worse lines for fights I've ever seen in HBO's history as of late. So for example if the average PBC favorite is -500 & the average HBO favorite is -2800 than that shows you how garbage HBO's fights have been as of late & how much more competitive PBC's fights have been based upon the public perception which drives the betting lines. I agree with you that the sample sizes are quite small. I mainly did this to see if this way of comparing the quality of match ups could be useful in the future. Hopefully HBO's budget restraints will end soon, but until then there is won't be much more data. I think using betting odds could be an interesting way of improving the method. I'm not much of a gambler, though, so I have some questions about it. How much are the odds affected by the "hype" around a fighter, compared to their actual record? Do betting firms have analysts that look at fighters, or do they just go purely on how people bet? If it's the latter how do they come up with the starting odds? Also, is there a site that gives the average odds for all bookmakers?

Where was the study conducted, in your ass?

So now we are using statistics to tell us which fights entertained us the most? Maybe do a SWOT analysis and flowcharts to determine where Boxing is headed in 2017/8. Meanwhile, I'll just crack open a beer and enjoy watching the fights I look forward to refardless of which network it is on.

Another hbo vs pbc/showtime thread, let's just enjoy boxing . You're right of course, but these discussions aren't likely to end on there own. I was just hoping some objectivity might put some of the arguments to bed.

What does that have to do with anything? If this is what you truly believe you have disproved your theory bu revealing how HBO and PBC are entirely different entities in general? Then why compare them in the same vain?. You are comparing HBO to PBC, casuals are not so keen into how a fight is made. They simply see the fact it is on HBO, your branding theory is assuming casuals are of a higher business IQ than they really are. why not compare spike tv to HBO then!!!??? My thinking behind this was that for fights outside of North America, most of the revenue doesn't come from the American TV network (otherwise the fight would be taking place in US Primetime), so it's fair to say that they have less influence on the match up. Remember, I'm not comparing "brands" here. Of course it would be ridiculous to compare HBO and PBC as they are two different types of organisations (theoretically PBC shows could appear on HBO). What I'm doing is comparing the match ups of the brands, which I think are distinctly different between the two, and therefore worth comparing. 10% is not enough to justify something as being "better" even if the odds can never exceed 50%. Your thesis is based on subjective preference. HBO has better fighters, Spence, Thurman and wilder are really all PBC has going in terms of star power. I would MUCH rather watch lomachenko, wlad, fury, anthony, kovalev ward, GGG Joshua than I would most of the PBC fighters. The guys i like watching for PBC like porter and Lee are not stars. lol Like I said, if you have a subjective preference for some fighters, or you find certain fights entertaining even if they're not close, you might prefer either PBC or HBO more. But what I'm trying to do is give an objective way of comparing the closeness of the match ups as this is what fans complain about most of the time.

HBO is in the star business, they don't mingle in middle of the road talent like PBC does. That's why they don't have any shows, they have like 4 fighters they show and that's it. All the good fights go to PPV which sucks. HBO is failing hard the last few years.

You need a "study" to tell you HBO Boxing is garbage?

10% better is definitely justification lol wtf. Or 12% actually which is what it was. A legit thing to take issue with is the sample size as we are only looking at the data for a total of 52 fights. So if a mere 3 more favorites have won on the PBC side there is nothing to discuss here. That's why I mentioned the betting odds cuz I bet all the time & see lines all the time & HBO's fights have had some of the worse lines for fights I've ever seen in HBO's history as of late. So for example if the average PBC favorite is -500 & the average HBO favorite is -2800 than that shows you how garbage HBO's fights have been as of late & how much more competitive PBC's fights have been based upon the public perception which drives the betting lines. I could just use the metric "compelling fights" and use the fight lineup for HBO as my basis. I value watching the fighter i like...a potential for an upset doesn't instantly make a fight "good".....

Wrong, and a bad thesis. "To make a fair comparison, I am only going to compare bouts that take place in North America, as HBO, being a TV network, sometimes buys rights for fights from other countries, but I believe are not involved in putting those fights together (e.g. for Wladimir Klitschko vs. Tyson Fury their branding was not on the ring apron). PBC, of course, are not a TV network, so their branding is not involved in fights that they don't help to organise." What does that have to do with anything? If this is what you truly believe you have disproved your theory bu revealing how HBO and PBC are entirely different entities in general? Then why compare them in the same vain?. You are comparing HBO to PBC, casuals are not so keen into how a fight is made. They simply see the fact it is on HBO, your branding theory is assuming casuals are of a higher business IQ than they really are. why not compare spike tv to HBO then!!!??? 10% is not enough to justify something as being "better" even if the odds can never exceed 50%. Your thesis is based on subjective preference. HBO has better fighters, Spence, Thurman and wilder are really all PBC has going in terms of star power. I would MUCH rather watch lomachenko, wlad, fury, anthony, kovalev ward, GGG Joshua than I would most of the PBC fighters. The guys i like watching for PBC like porter and Lee are not stars. It always comes down to preference.

Another hbo vs pbc/showtime thread, let's just enjoy boxing .

Difference is PBC got triple the number of fighters compared to TR/GBP combined. Meaning, one has more choices.

Well done, you are right

Introduction As it has been a big debate, and there is bias on both sides, I wanted to come up with an objective way of determining whether PBC or HBO have been putting on better fights. My idea is this: if the "A-side" going into a fight doesn't win as often under one brand, their fights are less predictable and more even, making their matchmaking better. Of course, there are other criteria that make fights interesting (such as rivalries, whether fight is for the no. 1 position, high action fights etc.), but these are harder to measure and compare objectively. Plus, top fighters not being put in enough close match ups is probably the biggest complaint of boxing fans today (too many tune-ups, fights against bums etc.), so I thought this would be the most important criteria to compare. I plan to compare the same number of HBO and PBC shows and to use the HBO and PBC boxing schedules on their websites to determine whose name was first in the billing and so who was the "A-side" (This is normally the same order as on fight posters and other promotional material. For example HBO's website lists Floyd Mayweather vs. Manny Pacquiao, the same as the promotional material, even though Pacquiao was an HBO fighter and also a world champion). Feel free to skip ahead to the results and analysis if you like, but first I'm going to outline my methodology for those of you that are interested. Methodology I'm using bouts from the beginning of March 2015, the month when PBC debuted, to the end of 2015, as after this point, HBO's budget cuts make a comparison unfair. HBO put on fewer cards than PBC in 2015, so below I have compared all of the HBO cards that were shown to the biggest PBC events (in my view). I am only comparing the main events and co-main of each card because life's too short, and I think comparing these events are the most important thing and will give the overall trend anyway. Sometimes co-main events are not listed on the websites (I'm not sure why - possibly because they weren't shown on TV) so it is impossible to include these. This means I might be comparing a different number of bouts for PBC and HBO. However, it is the percentage of "upsets" that we are interested in so this shouldn't matter. To make a fair comparison, I am only going to compare bouts that take place in North America, as HBO, being a TV network, sometimes buys rights for fights from other countries, but I believe are not involved in putting those fights together (e.g. for Wladimir Klitschko vs. Tyson Fury their branding was not on the ring apron). PBC, of course, are not a TV network, so their branding is not involved in fights that they don't help to organise. I have not included HBO PPV cards because I thought comparing "regular" HBO (World Championship Boxing and Boxing After Dark) with the top rated PBC network shows was comparing like for like. There were some Showtime shows that were not described as PBC cards during this time e.g. (Molina vs Providnikov) and I haven't included these in my comparison or any cards on any network not branded HBO Boxing or PBC. PBC have a habit of listing an "A-side" by who the title holder is, not who the bigger name is when the bigger name is the challenger (e.g. ZLATICANIN vs GARCIA). HBO do this the other way around in the same circumstances (e.g. Canelo Alvarez vs. Liam Smith, not included in the results as it was a PPV). I swapped the order for PBC bouts where the "B-side" was obviously the bigger name before the bout. I denoted bouts where I have swapped the billing by an asterix (*). Of course this is done subjectively, but I have tried to err on the side of caution (The only change I made was for the Lee vs Quillin bout). Some bouts are, of course, 50/50s and it may have been a toss up who was chosen to be the "A-side". Fortunately (for this study, anyway) such bouts are rare in non-PPV boxing main and co-main events, so they shouldn't effect results too much. I am using the official results but, of course, some of these will be robberies/ incorrect based on subjective views. There is no way around this, but I assume bad decisions will average out the same over both schedules. Finally, I am counting whether the "A-side" won rather than whether the "B-side" lost as the "B-side" acheiveing a draw is still an upset in my view. Results HBO 14 Cards - 24 Bouts Bout - Did "A-side" win? Zou Shiming vs. Amnet Ruenroeng - N Sergey Kovalev vs. Jean Pascal - Y Vyacheslav Glazkov vs. Steve Cunningham - Y Lucas Matthysse vs. Ruslan Provodnikov - Y Terence Crawford vs. Thomas Dulorme - Y Wladimir Klitschko vs. Bryant Jennings - Y Sadam Ali vs. Francisco Santana - Y Canelo Alvarez vs. James Kirkland - Y Gennady Golovkin vs. Willie Monroe Jr. - Y Roman Gonzalez vs. Edgar Sosa - Y Miguel Cotto vs. Daniel Geale - Y Nicholas Walters vs. Miguel Marriaga - Y Felix Verdejo vs. Ivan Najera - Y Timothy Bradley Jr. vs. Jessie Vargas - Y Oscar Valdez vs. Ruben Tamayo - Y Sergey Kovalev vs. Nadjib Mohammedi - Y Jean Pascal vs. Yuniesky Gonzalez - Y Lucas Matthysse vs. Viktor Postol - N Humberto Soto vs. Antonio Orozco - N Terence Crawford vs. Dierry Jean - Y Timothy Bradley vs. Brandon Rios - Y Vasyl Lomachenko vs. Romulo Koasicha - Y Bryant Jennings vs. Luis Ortiz - N Nicholas Walters vs. Jason Sosa - N 5/ 24 - 20.8 % "upsets" PBC 14 Cards - 28 Bouts Bout - Did "A-side" win? THURMAN vs GUERRERO - Y BRONER vs MOLINA JR - Y BERTO vs LOPEZ - Y PORTER vs BONE - Y STEVENSON vs BIKA - Y GARCIA vs PETERSON - Y QUILLIN vs LEE * - N DIRRELL vs JACK - N JACOBS vs TRUAX - Y FIGUEROA vs BURNS - Y KAMEDA vs MCDONNELL - N DIRRELL vs DEGALE - N RODRIGUEZ vs BAKER - Y KHAN vs ALGIERI - Y FORTUNA vs VASQUEZ - Y GUERRERO vs MARTINEZ - Y BRONER vs PORTER - N SPENCE vs LO GRECO - Y THURMAN vs COLLAZO - Y HARRISON vs NELSON - N GARCIA vs MALIGNAGGI - Y JACOBS vs MORA - Y TARVER vs CUNNINGHAM - N HUCK vs GLOWACKI - N SANTA CRUZ vs MARES - Y RUIZ vs CEJA - N WILDER vs DUHAUPAS - Y BREAZEALE vs KASSI - Y 9/ 28 - 32.1 % "upsets" Analysis The results of the study show that there is around a 10% higher chance of a PBC bout ending in an upset than an HBO bout. Considering that the chances of upset can never exceed 50%, this is a significantly better for PBC. It is also significant because PBC is generally criticised for having more predictable match ups than HBO. Although the study was only done for 2015, due to budget cuts for both HBO and PBC since, I believe the results would be largely similar. Finally, I am sure I may have made some mistake in the results, so please let me know and I will correct them. Likewise, let me know if you think there are problems any with my method, or if you have a different take on the results. I'm interested to hear your views! :boxing: I applaud your efforts. One of the best threads in a while. Can't really disagree I guess since you actually presented facts.