Canelo won Round 5 clearly! Not a close round

[craigus1990]

I've not watched the video, nor have I posted anything about this fight yet.... nor have I rewatched it since watching it live.... I wasn't really scoring it live... just semi-scoring it and enjoying it.... and I said at the end of the fight "I wouldn't argue with a draw". However - it is clear to me that Canelo won at least 4 of the first 6.... so it isn't hard to give him 2 or 3 of the last 6.... so how people are going nuts about this decision is beyond me.... it's totally fair and I think if you are arguing who 'more likely' won... I'd favour Canelo for the early rounds. GGG left it too late and didn't have great championship rounds either.

[Johnny2x2x]

I'm curious, how does this computer count punches? Are there sensors anywhere on any equipment or on the boxers that count punches? Or is a human being siting there hitting a button whenever they see a punch landing.

It's 2 guys watching the fight with 4 buttons each. jab landed, jab missed, power punch landed, power punch missed.

Each operator takes one fighter. So if that 1 person can't see because they are blocked they could completely miss a 6 punch combo that landed. You also are at the mercy of 2 different perceptions. If one judge is counting any graze as landing and they get assigned GGG then you can have wildly different stats from what really happened.

What they should do is randomize the rounds. Say operator 1 gets GGG for rounds 2,4,6,7,8, and 11 and gets Canelo for rounds 1, 3, 5, 9, 10, and 12. That would normalize some of the variance. I guess that might be too confusing though.

So if Canelo gets assigned a Compubox operator that only counts super clean punches as landing his numbers could be way low compared to the more ******* operator on the other side.

I think someone had a good thread about round 1 where the operator who was assigned GGG said he landed 15 punches when there is no way he landed more than 7 or 8.

[HarvardBlue]

It's 2 guys watching the fight with 4 buttons each. jab landed, jab missed, power punch landed, power punch missed.

Each operator takes one fighter. So if that 1 person can't see because they are blocked they could completely miss a 6 punch combo that landed. You also are at the mercy of 2 different perceptions. If one judge is counting any graze as landing and they get assigned GGG then you can have wildly different stats from what really happened.

What they should do is randomize the rounds. Say operator 1 gets GGG for rounds 2,4,6,7,8, and 11 and gets Canelo for rounds 1, 3, 5, 9, 10, and 12. That would normalize some of the variance. I guess that might be too confusing though.

So if Canelo gets assigned a Compubox operator that only counts super clean punches as landing his numbers could be way low compared to the more ******* operator on the other side.

I think someone had a good thread about round 1 where the operator who was assigned GGG said he landed 15 punches when there is no way he landed more than 7 or 8.

If you're correct then there's always room for human error. There's also no way you can guarantee neutrality.

I already said the stats were skewed in favor of Golovkin. I do think he landed more punches but I don't think it was at the rate they were counting.

[j.razor]

I've not watched the video, nor have I posted anything about this fight yet.... nor have I rewatched it since watching it live.... I wasn't really scoring it live... just semi-scoring it and enjoying it.... and I said at the end of the fight "I wouldn't argue with a draw". However - it is clear to me that Canelo won at least 4 of the first 6.... so it isn't hard to give him 2 or 3 of the last 6.... so how people are going nuts about this decision is beyond me.... it's totally fair and I think if you are arguing who 'more likely' won... I'd favour Canelo for the early rounds. GGG left it too late and didn't have great championship rounds either.

You have harold ledderman & jim lampley to thank for that. Low I.Q.'s listen to them instead of actually paying attention & watching a fight round by round.

[Johnny2x2x]

If you're correct then there's always room for human error. There's also no way you can guarantee neutrality.

I already said the stats were skewed in favor of Golovkin. I do think he landed more punches but I don't think it was at the rate they were counting.

They are just as subjective as the actual judges with one big diference, a bad compubox judge will never be questioned about his bad night.

And just like most fans, what if a particular compubox judge largely ignored body work? That can dramatically effect the pinch count.

My thought is that there are a data point, but sometime can be way way off. Just as often though I bet they are pretty accurate.

[j0zef]

[IMG]https://media.*****.com/media/q36NEi45WbSuY/*****.gif[/IMG]

[kafkod]

It's a video.

Close round, but GGG won it clearly.

Note: You don't win a round by shaking your head after getting hit. Your opponent wins the round for hitting you!

[kafkod]

I've not watched the video, nor have I posted anything about this fight yet.... nor have I rewatched it since watching it live.... I wasn't really scoring it live... just semi-scoring it and enjoying it.... and I said at the end of the fight "I wouldn't argue with a draw". However - it is clear to me that Canelo won at least 4 of the first 6.... so it isn't hard to give him 2 or 3 of the last 6.... so how people are going nuts about this decision is beyond me.... it's totally fair and I think if you are arguing who 'more likely' won... I'd favour Canelo for the early rounds. GGG left it too late and didn't have great championship rounds either.

You have harold ledderman & jim lampley to thank for that. Low I.Q.'s listen to them instead of actually paying attention & watching a fight round by round.

People with really low IQs don't realise that not everybody watching the fight can hear the same commentary as them..

[mathed]

Haha..... the Candelitatards are trying their best, I'll give them that.

It's like building a dam out of twigs with the goal of stopping a tidal wave.