COMPUBOX flawed...?

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Nautilus
    ...
    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
    • Apr 2004
    • 6083
    • 402
    • 761
    • 13,468

    #1

    COMPUBOX flawed...?

    Watching Raheem-Freitas fight, I thought Freitas was landing many more effective and powerfull punches. Yet COMPUBOX numbers suggested that Raheem was the one landing more punches...

    The question thus is, how biased is COMPUBOX in general?

    It seems to me that there should be a huge variation in accuracy of COMPUBOX depending on

    (a) which people count the punches,
    (b) what consitutes a landed punch (landed vs partially landed), and
    (c) visibility of punches (quick vs slow).
  • Easy-E
    Gotta want it
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Jul 2005
    • 22686
    • 865
    • 1,739
    • 32,777

    #2
    Originally posted by Nautilus
    Watching Raheem-Freitas fight, I thought Freitas was landing many more effective and powerfull punches. Yet COMPUBOX numbers suggested that Raheem was the one landing more punches...

    The question thus is, how biased is COMPUBOX in general?

    It seems to me that there should be a huge variation in accuracy of COMPUBOX depending on

    (a) which people count the punches,
    (b) what consitutes a landed punch (landed vs partially landed), and
    (c) visibility of punches (quick vs slow).
    Compubox is flawed, but i disagree with you, i thought raheem was landing more effective punches on a consistant basis, while freitas landed several really good shots.

    If you watch the Mayweather Castillo fight, youll see how flawed compubox is, they count punches where castillo hits floyd in the arm over and over again.

    Comment

    • tracylee
      B Scene's Julia Roberts
      Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
      • Apr 2004
      • 8181
      • 588
      • 865
      • 16,433

      #3
      Originally posted by Nautilus
      Watching Raheem-Freitas fight, I thought Freitas was landing many more effective and powerfull punches. Yet COMPUBOX numbers suggested that Raheem was the one landing more punches...

      The question thus is, how biased is COMPUBOX in general?

      It seems to me that there should be a huge variation in accuracy of COMPUBOX depending on

      (a) which people count the punches,
      (b) what consitutes a landed punch (landed vs partially landed), and
      (c) visibility of punches (quick vs slow).
      It's definately flawed, thanks to human error. I've never put much wt. in compubox just because of that, and it cant possibly "show" how a fight really went.

      Comment

      • DiegoFuego
        Ask my dad, I'm GAY!
        Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
        • Jan 2005
        • 17338
        • 1,403
        • 586
        • 24,657

        #4
        Freitas outlanded Raheem by miles in the first 6 rounds so yes, Compubox is flawed. Even with their bias though, Raheem only outlanded Freitas by about 6 punches

        Comment

        • Xcel
          I've been better than you
          Platinum Champion - 1,000-5,000 posts
          • Mar 2006
          • 1965
          • 159
          • 85
          • 8,488

          #5
          Maybe..but Freitas wasnt landing many shots. It looked good, but he wasnt landing many good shots. When he did, it was good, but there were far and few in between.

          Comment

          Working...
          TOP