Lomachenko dominates Compubox Ratings...

[Robbie Barrett]

If the statistics are wrong and everyone knows they're wrong and they don't take in to account quality of opposition makes them useless.

The fact that they once had Danny Jacobs on a +/- +24 should more than prove that they are useless on determining how good a fighter is.

Compubox has too much influence on people. When someone sees a fight they don't agree the result of what's the first thing they do? Start bringing up inaccurate numbers from compubox. If you can find them compare the compubox punch stats of Klitschko-Haye to Sky Sports punch stats. People fail to realise that these stats are just regular people/fans trying to count punches real time, that's a lot harder than many of you think and will be affected by biases even if they try not to be.

[Robbie Barrett]

No other sport would present inaccurate data to the fans and the worst thing about it they never tell them it's inaccurate. The casuals swallow it like it's facts.

[McNulty]

i like còck

hey mong, compubox is broke don't you fùcking get it yet?????????????

[chrisJS]

No other sport would present inaccurate data to the fans and the worst thing about it they never tell them it's inaccurate. The casuals swallow it like it's facts.

Not too big into compubox myself, but I'm just curious do you feel they are more wrong or more right depending on who's fighting? Like there's a bias or agenda behind it? Are they just more inaccurate when it shines a positive light on a fighter you don't like?

[Robbie Barrett]

Not too big into compubox myself, but I'm just curious do you feel they are more wrong or more right depending on who's fighting? Like there's a bias or agenda behind it? Are they just more inaccurate when it shines a positive light on a fighter you don't like?

A couple of year ago i watched some fights to see how accurate they were and they were way off. Called them BS ever since. I knew they'd be wrong but it was surprising how wrong they were.

[chrisJS]

A couple of year ago i watched some fights to see how accurate they were and they were way off. Called them BS ever since. I knew they'd be wrong but it was surprising how wrong they were.

I've never bothered to do it because, well I can't think of anything more pointless to do. The most I'd do on re-watching a fight it score it. They are probably inaccurate both ways. I think in general they are a good reference across multiple fights if you're really into stats and such. One fight which I am not going to count the shots but clearly compubox looked off on was Marquez-Pacquaio III. Marquez seemed to land more shots as well as the harder shots and the cleaner shots that did more.

I had fun with the Pac fans claiming that punch stats settled it and then pointed out the stats in fight I & II knowing the counter argument would be the the knockdowns to which I countered with well, the other 11 rounds being judged solely on the precious compubox numbers fight I would have been a draw and fight II a Marquez win.

[.!WAR MIKEY!.]

what teh quickest way to find out a person DKSAB? if he quotes compubox stats he DKSAB lmfao

[Citizen Koba]

what teh quickest way to find out a person DKSAB? if he quotes compubox stats he DKSAB lmfao

C'mon man, we're on NSB. The quickest way of telling whether someone DKSAB is if they disagree with you.

[.!WAR MIKEY!.]

C'mon man, we're on NSB. The quickest way of telling whether someone DKSAB is if they disagree with you.

Nope thats how I tell if they are racist cause Im always right so it must be that.

[Floyd is TBE]

I don't like any kind of sports "data" that's subject to human bias. I roll my eyes when I'm talking NFL and some jerk wad brings up QBR or PFF grades. I don't get how in 2018 we got all this advanced tech. but when it comes to tracking punches in boxing we can't come up with a system better than some random guy pushing a button