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

[jmrf4435]

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".....

[Mitchell Kane]

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

[Eff Pandas]

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".....

That's a much more subjective thing doe thus means less. TS isn't using data about his opinions.

For me & I suspect most fans they wanna see competitive fights so the more competitive the fight looks going in &/or the more competitive the fight ends up being the better. And underdogs winning suggests competition better than "compelling fights" whatever that means for you. A compelling fight to me is a competitive, evenly matched as possible fight.

[Jsmooth9876]

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.

[stiff_back]

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 en****** 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.

[stiff_back]

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.

[GhostofDempsey]

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.

[SeekDaGreat]

Where was the study conducted, in your ass?

[stiff_back]

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?

[Sweet Jones]

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