Originally posted by Dr Rumack
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Do you believe Compubox is accurate?
Collapse
-
How accurate do you think a group of BS posters would be if they counted punches and averaged their numbers against each other?
Exactly, it's plenty accurate. Quit stealing your thoughts from social media.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dr Rumack View PostSlow 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.
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/box...-decision.html
Comment
-
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?
Comment
-
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?
Comment
-
Originally posted by _Maxi View PostReal 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/box...-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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by NaijaD View PostThis 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.
Comment
Comment