Comments Thread For: Crawford vs. Spence - CompuBox Head To Head Analysis

[Butch.McRae]

that is impossible, because they have totally different styles themselves

those stats are totally fkn meaningless

" who supports their stats for specific fights "

what did that mean..... ?

there are " no end with all the problems " to ALL of that rubbish

All stats aren't meaningless at all. Some are and others are very useful. You just have to know which ones to value.

[Butch.McRae]

Spence's jab is going to be the key in this match up. Spence's jab is what broke Brook's eye socket and has been the key punch to many of his fights. It will come down to Crawford's ability to nullify it and that will likely determine the winner in this fight.

I completely agree. I also think how Crawford handles Spence's counter hooks to the body is another key variable. Spence has a habit of taking fire to throw a sharp hook underneath. It's a subtle thing, but I'm certain that's how he keeps getting stoppages.

[Boxing Goat]

Very comparable other than the defense.

[sicko]

Interesting! Both excellent fighters, hopefully we get that fight sooner rather than later. Only concern is how long can Spence Jr keep making 147

[aboutfkntime]

All stats aren't meaningless at all. Some are and others are very useful. You just have to know which ones to value.

give one working example how they have helped you..... EVER !!

if they were helpful, matchmakers and bookies would use them

they are fodder for the casuals

[Madison Boxing]

Spence demoloshed his c level opponent whereas crawford struggled against his. Im telllig u, u guys making put crawford is some atg talent will get a shock when he figts an elite welter

[aboutfkntime]

Marginally, 7 to 9 per round isn't crazy lol

What's substantially different is their activity levels.

I think its interesting that the author left out data in this write up that was included in their last one.

Spence scores in the mid 60s on their rating system (# 1 at WW), while Crawford scores in the mid 40s (# 2 at WW). Why? Because they're landing at nearly the same rate, getting hit about the same amount, but Spence is way more active. Just average the punches per round out over 12 rounds

you can clearly see that by watching any 1 Spence fight, and any 1 Crawford fight..... no compu-bullshlt required

[aboutfkntime]

when Spence's handlers are preparing him for Crawford..... will they pull up compubox, or will they review Crawford's fights?

[CLUE]

Spence gets hit more than Crawford, but we already knew that.

This weekend says different. I'll use my own eyes, we have never seen Spence get hit that clean that many times by that level of a fighter, like Crawford was. And Spence fight aggressively and throws more, meaning he should get hit more.

[Butch.McRae]

give one working example how they have helped you..... EVER !!

if they were helpful, matchmakers and bookies would use them

they are fodder for the casuals

I think activity level is bankable when there are two guys who are equally talented but one has a true size/power advantage and is the more active guy. (Its a little more nuanced than that but that's basically what it comes down to.)

When I see that I know where to bet...I've bet on Hurd v. Lara and Loma v. Rigo for this same reason