Boxing Forums


.



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Predictive theories of boxing matches

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    438
    Cool Clicks

    Default Predictive theories of boxing matches

    I know 2

    1. Triangle Theory

    condition

    fighter A won over fighter B

    fighter B won over fighter C

    statement

    fighter A will win over fighter C

    evaluation

    Does not really work, only in trivial cases when there is a HUGE level difference between fighters

    counter example

    Sugar Ray, Hagler, Hearns, Benitez, Duran and their cross fights

    2. Max Powerism 101

    condition

    bigger [fighters] are better

    newer [fighters] are bigger

    statement

    newer [fighters] are better

    evaluation

    cannot be really assessed because is usually applied to fighters from different generation
    by @maxpower

    counter example

    consider Broiler chicken and the one grown in a farm: which is more tastefull?
    Last edited by SugarBoxing; 03-04-2015 at 02:41 PM.
    Learn Mike Tyson style and elements of Peekaboo @ SugarBoxing

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,012
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    377
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Predictive theories of boxing matches

    NVSemin, Max Powerism 101 is possibly the ONLY predictive theory for boxing that any bookmaker would ever use if money was involved.

    Let's keep it modern, so things like training and relative competition are roughly equivalent.

    For every given example if you consider the weight and the experience together of the fighters and bet on the heftiest most experienced, you would win more often that not. You WILL STILL LOSE SOME. But, like the Casino, you will come up trumps in the end.

    Analyse the last 5-10 years if you like over boxrec. You will find that the experience plays a greater role at the lower weights and at HW the weight+experience is an more equal measure of prediction.

    It's pretty much like horse racing. If you bet on 1 Melbourne Cup your favourite horse may still not come in but if you bet on every Melbourne Cup there'll be a pattern.

    Max Powerism 101 is akin the "studying the form" in horse racing. And I also think studying the last several fights of both fighters is a good model as well.

    A sillier theory is the "styles make fights theory" which was basically debunked as soon as fighters developed KO punches (approx. 1980). The slugger, swarmer, boxer system is scrapped. You are either an infighter or an outfighter and either an aggressive puncher or a counter puncher. The power of your punch does not play a role in your style. I mean what is "slugger" style? Stand there and throw punches? No way!
    "Enough with the games mate! Your messing with the Grand Master!"

    Lennox Lewis

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    10,349
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1138
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Predictive theories of boxing matches

    A swarmer beats boxer, a slugger beats swarmer and a boxer beats slugger.

    Speed beats power but timing beats speed.
    Hidden Content
    Original & Best: The Sugar Man

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    438
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Predictive theories of boxing matches

    Quote Originally Posted by Max Power View Post
    NVSemin, Max Powerism 101 is possibly the ONLY predictive theory for boxing that any bookmaker would ever use if money was involved.

    Let's keep it modern, so things like training and relative competition are roughly equivalent.

    For every given example if you consider the weight and the experience together of the fighters and bet on the heftiest most experienced, you would win more often that not. You WILL STILL LOSE SOME. But, like the Casino, you will come up trumps in the end.

    Analyse the last 5-10 years if you like over boxrec. You will find that the experience plays a greater role at the lower weights and at HW the weight+experience is an more equal measure of prediction.

    It's pretty much like horse racing. If you bet on 1 Melbourne Cup your favourite horse may still not come in but if you bet on every Melbourne Cup there'll be a pattern.

    Max Powerism 101 is akin the "studying the form" in horse racing. And I also think studying the last several fights of both fighters is a good model as well.

    A sillier theory is the "styles make fights theory" which was basically debunked as soon as fighters developed KO punches (approx. 1980). The slugger, swarmer, boxer system is scrapped. You are either an infighter or an outfighter and either an aggressive puncher or a counter puncher. The power of your punch does not play a role in your style. I mean what is "slugger" style? Stand there and throw punches? No way!
    Look, I have not really evaluated seriously Max Powerism 101, but I DO LOVE IT.

    You know why?

    It is simple. Like I just said, I need to study more whether it really works, but it is the simplicity that attracts me.
    Learn Mike Tyson style and elements of Peekaboo @ SugarBoxing

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,619
    Mentioned
    66 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    427
    Cool Clicks

    Default

    It's stupid, just look at when guys gain weight. By Maxs logic that should improve their chances but there is an insurmountable mountain of evidence that fighters that gain weight do worse. It's stupid and totally thoroughly and completely debunked.

    And the swarmed was eliminated by 15 round fights being eliminated, not because it is an inferior style. That is stupid too. They needed the time to wear a guy out.

    Do you have any more incorrect statements Max? I'll ask it more simply, do you have any more statements? The "incorrect" is implied.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Up in the attic
    Posts
    26,460
    Mentioned
    440 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    3909
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Predictive theories of boxing matches

    Quote Originally Posted by Max Power View Post

    A sillier theory is the "styles make fights theory" which was basically debunked as soon as fighters developed KO punches (approx. 1980). The slugger, swarmer, boxer system is scrapped. You are either an infighter or an outfighter and either an aggressive puncher or a counter puncher. The power of your punch does not play a role in your style. I mean what is "slugger" style? Stand there and throw punches? No way!
    Slugger style is like Marcianos, take some to give some, not much sideways movment, not much going back just head down bore in and win.

    Styles make fights, doesnt really mean one beats the other,(although it could and does sometimes) it mostly means it makes for a better fight when two fighters dont have the exact same style or similar. It hasnt been debunked because it didnt mean 100% what you claim there.

    'The power of your punch does not play a role in your style' is also false depending on how you throw your power shots.
    Hidden Content " border="0" />

    I can explain it.
    But I cant understand it for you.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,978
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1208
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Predictive theories of boxing matches

    This is my first salvo on the Duck-Ped fight. I've seen many folks here and elsewhere who say that it would be an easy fight for Floyd against Manny since Floyd easily beat Marquez against whom Pac struggled against and was ultimately KO'd by. Let me say that that is a very simplistic and somewhat erroneous assumption. I really don't blame them though as most of them, sometimes even the so-called X-perts, don't really understand the intricacies of boxing.

    Most of you probably heard that style makes fights, so let me start by saying Marquez' style and Floyd's are not the same. Marquez is almost a pure counter-puncher while Floyd is not. Floyd style is more closer to Bradley than Marquez. There is one big difference though, though Brad is a pretty good puncher speed and volume wise but still he is a conventional puncher - meaning he punches like most other good punchers, while Floyd is a very accurate puncher who chooses his shot very well. There is no name for Floyd's style so let me invent a name for it - it's more of a defensive and precision pot-shot-er (ya, ya, it wasn't nice sounding but I think it did describe his style pretty well) - he masterfully dodges shots while accurately taking pot-shots at the slightest of opening in the opponents defense, not necessarily countering though.

    Marquez lost to Floyd because he, the counter-puncher, tried to take an offensive role and did it half-heartedly, many times tentative and hesitant in his attacks, just running into Floyd's trap. Hatton did a better job because obviously he made up his mind to go for an all-out offense, a kamikaze attack. He charged into Floyd and got him with some nice shots but was tagged with more and better shots on the way. That took toll on him later and by around the middle of the fight, he was gassed out and pretty much beaten up.

    Now don't forget, if Floyd is the best defensive fighter, Pac is the best offensive one. Now how both styles will fare on the ring is something that all serious boxing fans like me are waiting to see. Floyd has struggled sometimes with lesser puncher so how will he fare against arguably (I'm just saying 'arguably' to keep the haters away) the best puncher of this generation. I'm pretty sure that even at it's worst, it won't be as worse as many fan-boys think, if you know what I mean. That's obviously the reason why the odds are getting more even as the fight gets closer. That is why some great boxers like SRL and Holyfield are having hard time making up their minds, somewhat leaning towards Floyd but now it's a toss-up for them, and probably they'll change their minds again. (The great Nacho Beristein said he was sure Pac will win but just in few days he changed his mind and gave Pac 45% chance.) I'm leaning very slightly towards Floyd. One reason is I'm not sure if Pac's punch resistance is still fully intact after that great KO. But if he can take Floyd's punches, then I think it will be a pretty even fight - one part of me saying Pac will give lots of trouble with his high volume power shots that Floyd has never tasted, while the other part saying Floyd will keep on back-tracking, throwing those precision pot shots at Pac and Pac unable to do much, or maybe somewhere in-between...
    (Sorry for any typo's, just don't have the time to check 'em now)
    Once in awhile, get outside in fresh air, take a deep breath & with a deep sigh, let out all the things that's bottled up inside you & be free, & you'll get a glimpse of nirvana.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,428
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    438
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Predictive theories of boxing matches

    If Hatton was able to keep the guards properly and chin down, that would be a game changer.
    Learn Mike Tyson style and elements of Peekaboo @ SugarBoxing

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    2,012
    Mentioned
    63 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    377
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Predictive theories of boxing matches

    @NVSemin

    Obviously at some point a boxer loses his athleticism and reflexes as he ages which counteracts experience.

    Therefore I believe the prime of a boxer to be that point where the balance between a fighters experience (ring IQ/Skills) and athleticism (speed, reflex, condition) provides the most formidable package (with weight also taken into account esp at HW.

    And again, this "prime" is again highly individualistic with regards to the opponent being fought. A particular point on the graph might provide the optimal package to beat a certain style but not for another and another point might better suit another style.

    So this of course expands on the already simply outlined concept.

    And as for @Ron Swanson trying to claim weight is a negative factor, I would like to point out some points...

    - Over any representative sample of boxers, the chances are higher that the heftier boxer will win and also that those chances are greater the greater the difference. This is shown by statistics and is blatant common sense!

    - Your jibe was, I suppose, geared mainly toward HW boxers gaining fat. Well in some cases I would agree, where that weight gain has been due to undertraining. However in most cases at HW, the boxers who are rubbished are elite athletes who train all day, every day and merely eat enough food to retain bodyfat. In this case, the weight can ONLY be an advantage. If the boxer is fast enough to catch his opponent and fit enough to beat his opponent over the required number of rounds, then that fighter is conditioned for boxing and it does not matter whether the boxer is chubby or not.

    - The added weight may detract from stamina (but also may sap opponents stamina and muscle weight reduces stamina more than fat weight) and may reduce speed (fat weight reduces speed LESS than muscle weight). but also confers other benefits too like punch resistance and crude power.

    - We are not talking about obese boxers who don't train, and we are not talking about ordinary chubby people. We are talking about professional boxers who are otherwise conditioned and if they weren't conditioned, they would not be in top level professional boxing in the first place.
    "Enough with the games mate! Your messing with the Grand Master!"

    Lennox Lewis

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Would Tag Team Matches Work In Boxing?
    By FinitoElDinamita in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-30-2013, 05:25 AM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-25-2011, 05:23 PM
  3. Fight Purses in Some Boxing Matches
    By generalbulldog in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03-11-2010, 04:15 PM
  4. This weeks boxing matches.
    By toogood4u in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-12-2007, 05:54 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  





Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Videos | Boxing Forum | Boxing Books | Boxing Posters | Learn to Box | Advanced Fighting Methods | Boxing Rankings | Boxing Schedule | Auctions | Fun and Games | Boxing Equipment

Copyright © 2000 - 2019 Saddo Boxing - Boxing