Comments Thread For: Inside The CompuBox Numbers: Horn Defeats Pacquiao

[aboutfkntime]

Idk how many more punches Manny landed than Horn, but I'm sure he did. If Compubox is 99% right or 80% right idk, but scoring & punch stats rarely match exactly.

Neither method of gauging the story of the fight is 100% effective or 100% accurate. Although obviously the judges scoring is the official narrative of the fight.

BUT lets not act like scoring has never been wrong all of a sudden either in the minds of many or most fans & pundits.

compubox is not even close

I agree with Robbie Barrett

It's embarrassing that the media and fans are posting them like they're facts.

[aboutfkntime]

.
Take out round 9, Pac still outlanded Hor, 153-82.
Pac had about 2 1/2 more power punches landed in round 9 than Horn.
Horn threw more punches in 9 of 12 rounds. Threw more does not mean you win the round. He just outthrew Pac.
Horn landed more power punches in 3 rounds. 3.
In six of the rounds, Pac has an edge of 6 or less in power punches. Buy still, He outlanded Horn in power punches.
The last 2, i am not really comparing this fight to previous fights. Yes, his percentages are lower, his older now.

The only thing that Horn beat in the stats above is he outhrew Pac and the 3 rounds were he outlanded Pac in power punches. So, Horn did not beat Pac on compubox.

did you really attempt to spin those wakk figures..... ?

the very worst scenario, and the main problem with compubox..... is that someone will pick up those wakk figures and attempt to analyze them

[aboutfkntime]

Horn was throwing but hitting glove, elbow or air. He was active but not efficient. I had it closer, but after the replay I really paid attention and horn was very sloppy. He was very Loosie Goosey.
Manny definitely got robbed, now matter how people spin it.

that's nice maxi

[Eff Pandas]

compubox is not even close

I agree with Robbie Barrett

It's embarrassing that the media and fans are posting them like they're facts.

Whats "not even close"? But I agree they aren't 100% so we agree more or less.

I'd love to see some neutral person run the numbers. Hell I wish compubox quit the bs & did 100% legit numbers after the fight at their leisure & for classic fights to legit see where they actually stood & quit acting like their numbers are biblical or beyond reproach.

My bottom line is I think compubox numbers tell the story of the fight more often then not (that means not 100% of the time just for clarity & to avoid being misquoted) just like the judges scorecards tell the story of the fight more often then not (that means not 100% of the time too).

And I think this time the scorecards didn't tell the story of the fight as good as the compubox numbers cuz while I agree the compubox isn't 100% I think a 9-3 Horn scorecard required more error or corruption by a judge then any compubox button masher could have done Saturday night.

[aboutfkntime]

Whats "not even close"? But I agree they aren't 100% so we agree more or less.

I'd love to see some neutral person run the numbers. Hell I wish compubox quit the bs & did 100% legit numbers after the fight at their leisure & for classic fights to legit see where they actually stood & quit acting like their numbers are biblical or beyond reproach.

My bottom line is I think compubox numbers tell the story of the fight more often then not (that means not 100% of the time just for clarity & to avoid being misquoted) just like the judges scorecards tell the story of the fight more often then not (that means not 100% of the time too).

And I think this time the scorecards didn't tell the story of the fight as good as the compubox numbers cuz while I agree the compubox isn't 100% I think a 9-3 Horn scorecard required more error or corruption by a judge then any compubox button masher could have done Saturday night.

yea, we mostly agree

I just objected to the words compubox, and 100%, being mentioned in the same sentence..... I don't think they are even close

I don't think they are anywhere near accurate enough to use to evaluate..... anything..... except maybe career punch-stats by historians..... but even then, the historian would have to hope that over a 10 year period there was some degree of consistency..... and I can't see it

compubox is worthless

[Eff Pandas]

yea, we mostly agree

I just objected to the words compubox, and 100%, being mentioned in the same sentence..... I don't think they are even close

I'd like to think anyone seriously discussing compubox wouldn't act like or imply those numbers are 100% accurate while discussing them. But that said I think one should be able to discuss them with it being known they aren't 100% just like we all know Horn didn't win 9 rounds Saturday as the one judge had it. Using "facts" compiled by others doesn't mean I believe their facts are 100% correct.

If that make sense cuz I'm not even sure I understood wtf I just said.

I don't think they are anywhere near accurate enough to use to evaluate..... anything..... except maybe career punch-stats by historians..... but even then, the historian would have to hope that over a 10 year period there was some degree of consistency..... and I can't see it

compubox is worthless

I definitely don't believe compubox are worthless numbers. Are they flawed? Sure. Very little in this world is perfect doe. Do they tell me the narrative of the fight more often then not? Yep. And in this flawed sport we all love thats good enough for me.

And like I said I'd love for compubox to get their head out of their ass & run their stats during the fight & then fine tooth comb go through them post fight to regulate how accurate they are or aren't publically & to have a historical pool of info that would be valuable to current & future boxing fans. I think that'd be one of the more worthwhile things they could do for the sport of boxing. I mean how are their not punch stats for great classic fights in history already? Show me punch stats for Ali vs Frazier ffs. So I'm very pro-stats in boxing, but how you use them, when you use them & not sniffing your own farts about them is key to making them more adopted & accepted.

Not to mention lets get some sensors in the gloves so these compubox guys don't even gotta button mash anymore.

[Vlad_]

that's nice maxi

Lmao I love you and the rest of ******ed Robbie's gang of trolls.
Anything else to post about my comment, other than calling me an alt?

[aboutfkntime]

I'd like to think anyone seriously discussing compubox wouldn't act like or imply those numbers are 100% accurate while discussing them. But that said I think one should be able to discuss them with it being known they aren't 100% just like we all know Horn didn't win 9 rounds Saturday as the one judge had it. Using "facts" compiled by others doesn't mean I believe their facts are 100% correct.

If that make sense cuz I'm not even sure I understood wtf I just said.



I definitely don't believe compubox are worthless numbers. Are they flawed? Sure. Very little in this world is perfect doe. Do they tell me the narrative of the fight more often then not? Yep. And in this flawed sport we all love thats good enough for me.

And like I said I'd love for compubox to get their head out of their ass & run their stats during the fight & then fine tooth comb go through them post fight to regulate how accurate they are or aren't publically & to have a historical pool of info that would be valuable to current & future boxing fans. I think that'd be one of the more worthwhile things they could do for the sport of boxing. I mean how are their not punch stats for great classic fights in history already? Show me punch stats for Ali vs Frazier ffs. So I'm very pro-stats in boxing, but how you use them, when you use them & not sniffing your own farts about them is key to making them more adopted & accepted.

Not to mention lets get some sensors in the gloves so these compubox guys don't even gotta button mash anymore.

the way you put it, those stats are not quite 100%

the way I put it, those stats are rubbish and should not be relied upon

I don't believe that they "tell the narrative of the fight" at all, I think they are often misleading

not for me, watching the fight tells so much more

[loui_ludwig]

did you really attempt to spin those wakk figures..... ?

the very worst scenario, and the main problem with compubox..... is that someone will pick up those wakk figures and attempt to analyze them

yes, so you can reply to it.

[Eff Pandas]

the way you put it, those stats are not quite 100%

the way I put it, those stats are rubbish and should not be relied upon

I don't believe that they "tell the narrative of the fight" at all, I think they are often misleading

not for me, watching the fight tells so much more

Well cmon brother, no sh^t watching the fight tells you more who's arguing that?

The fight itself is where you are saying these numbers are "rubbish" from & where I'm saying Horn didn't win 9 rounds from.

All I'm suggesting is the judges cards & compubox numbers are accurate more often than not + tell the story of what we just watched more or less. And the judges nor compubox are accurate 100% of the time. Plus I personally tend to believe when the judging is wrong there is often evidence of why its wrong in the compubox numbers along with what I saw with my own eyes. And my own eyes + compubox tell me that 9-3 Horn judge is incompetent or corrupt more than my eyes & the judges tell me the compubox button mashers are incompetent or corrupt.