Hey guys,
Does total punch stat numbers mean a thing to today's fight game? Total jabs, power punches AND punch percentage?
For example, what if the guy that "won" the fight, be behind on all stats? How could he win?
Printable View
Hey guys,
Does total punch stat numbers mean a thing to today's fight game? Total jabs, power punches AND punch percentage?
For example, what if the guy that "won" the fight, be behind on all stats? How could he win?
Amateur boxing is punch counting; in professional boxing you also consider the damage done by punches.
The problem I have with punch-stat numbers is that I don 't know the criteria by which they determine if a punch lands. An example is the first Chavez/taylor fight. They were counting punches that seemed to be being caught on gloves or deflected off shoulders and elbows.
... and with that, some of the "power shots" weren't really "power shots". The shots weren't telling blows.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
I think that they count every 'non-jab as a "power" shot. And how do you weigh a guy rolling with punches?Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamaja... and with that, some of the "power shots" weren't really "power shots". The shots weren't telling blows.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
I'm not a big fan of making boxing a statistical endeavor.
Hell naw punch output dont mean shit to me unless the other guy isnt throwing anything..
Effective aggression and clean punching over high workrate..
Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
Exactly. Its supposed to be a guideline of sorts but when you listen to Lapdog you would think the numbers were some kind of established fact. I remember its debut in the Mancini/Bramble fight. They kept it simple and it seemed much more accurate then today and even it was way off most times. I've often wondered how judges are effected that are sitting within ear shot of Jim because just like the clicker crew he routinely calls punches that were not even thrown.
Here is a little bit of what compubox co-founder Bob Canobbio had to say in an interview on another forum back in 2011.
Pure comedy.Quote:
“Over the years, we’ve enhanced the program, and our database has, of course, increased as we’ve done more fights,” explained Canobbio, who says the standard margin of error with CompuBox stats is in the neighborhood of two percent. “We’ve been able to build a database and determine what a weight class average is, what our record is for a weight class for punches thrown in a round and in a fight, one fighter, both fighters. So the stats have evolved as we’ve collected more data over the years. We’ve also added stuff to our live program, like being able to break down the punches landed minute by minute. And we do the Punch Zone now, which shows where the punches landed. That’s an addition.
“From my standpoint, I could probably add more categories, but I don’t want to sacrifice accuracy. We could do left hand and right hand if we wanted. But too many keys leads to too much thinking, and we don’t want to be thinking while we’re working. I don’t want to sacrifice accuracy.”
I think it breeds boxers in the ameaturs who just try and land anything rather than anything significant to get ahead on points. One of the things that impressed me the most about lomachenko's debut was he didn't seem to waste energy like most ameaturs coming up to the pro's.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita
Word.
Everything in life is about how effective it is.
Judging will always be biased to your personal opinion.
Quality>Quantity
Not at all, guys can easily win rounds and fights throwing and landing less than their opponent. You have to remember it's just people sitting ringside tapping buttons, it's by no means more accurate than what you could roughly estimate with your own eyes, and detracts from any other basis on which a fight is judged. Having said that it's not a bad thing to include in big fights just for shits, but I hate it when the commentators will cite the punch stars for every round prior as if they decide how it should've been scored.
Quality over quantity, exactly. Punch stats drive me nuts and are a fall back for network guys who would be bean counters in another life. You can see a guy claim a number, go back and rewatch the fight frame by frame and its a given a good portion miss, and in Lampleys case are not even the right fighter "landing".
Often times the two of those are confused.Quote:
Originally Posted by boyla
Soon they will eliminate the person with the clicker or what now is a key board and have a series of lazers formulating the punch stats. Boxing is one of the last things in this world that does not require digital involvement in the process. Nothing will ever be able to judge a fight better then the naked eye but that is because of what should be the simplicity of the 10 point must system. For thee Fk'd up human scorecards well that's another thread and its not even on the same tard chart as compubox. Technology does not have to be involved in every aspect of our lives. A pail with water and a stick is still the best mouse trap. I can just see it in the year 2050. A 100 point must system. The system I'm sure works well for baseball etc but it has no business in the ring let alone any validity attributed to it.
% of power punches landed seems to be a good indicator when you are landing close to 50%.
No.
This is why I scored Burns v Beltran a draw, Beltran throwing constantly, flurries of sloppy combos on burns arms and burns would land a little counter and move.
Effective punching.
pitter patter assholes like _______ and ___________ maY LAND a hundred more punches, like butterflies alighting on a stem, but they have no effect on the opponent.
And then other fighters may land only 2 punches, and........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZiltA50l7I
Lmfao speaking of pity patters, Calzaghe comes to mind.. he looked so funny when throwing those pity pat slap combos .. just looks so girly ..Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
I cant believe that same girly combo got him a stoppage victory over manfredo.. that was just criminal.
agreed, they got hit with a barrage of monarch shots, a few flurries of moth shots, and even a chrysalis or two, then the butterfly ref fluttered in and waved it off. utterly perplexing, really.
Well here is the thing if a guy is landing punches that are solid and has no power is he effective or if can't hurt the guy because of his chin. Effective punching pretty subjective really and damage on a fighter not always the telling how the fight went i wish there was a better system at time for judging.
Doing visible damage, stifling an attack and breaking momentum, controlling dictating ring real estate as a result and making opponents legs have disagreement thus leaving them with wonderment as to how they are now laying on the ceiling and why they cannot hear what the ref is yelling.
One of the old boxing writers, the guys that really knew about the game, said that judging boxing was easy. Any 10 year old could do it, just by looking at the two guys after the fight. I think it was Budd Schulberg that wrote that.
Of course in the era of pillow gloves and arm punchers, that kind of goes out the window.
There is nothing wrong with the 10 point must system. The problem is with some that use it. Some are the best trained but the worst educated. Some think that the more you complicate things the more evolved it becomes. That is fine for an Iphone.Compubox numbers muddy the water even further and should not imo be used on broadcasts to the extent that they are. When the bring out those silly body suits and suggest the body punch count and placement I just about hurl.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
They should remove the judges from ringside. There are to many blind spots and to many distractions. Give them the same camera angles we get. Many of the judges act like pseudo celebrities. Make them do what they are there to do w/o Pamela Andersons camel toe in the direct line of sight on the other side of the ring.
;D The crash test dummy graph that HBO uses. Has to be one of the most ridiculous uses of empty eye candy going.
And for god sakes just introduce the judges as you do the ref...make them stand, face to name on camera...and announce the e mail and home state ;D
Punches landed ask Jeff Lacy after he been hit by hundreds of punches,! by Calzaghe Jeff
looked like a Gargoyle after the fight.:jabbing:
Iaminut makes a point I'd bring up. They should remove the judges from ringside.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuitThere is nothing wrong with the 10 point must system. The problem is with some that use it. Some are the best trained but the worst educated. Some think that the more you complicate things the more evolved it becomes. That is fine for an Iphone.Compubox numbers muddy the water even further and should not imo be used on broadcasts to the extent that they are. When the bring out those silly body suits and suggest the body punch count and placement I just about hurl.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
They should remove the judges from ringside. There are to many blind spots and to many distractions. Give them the same camera angles we get. Many of the judges act like pseudo celebrities. Make them do what they are there to do w/o Pamela Andersons camel toe in the direct line of sight on the other side of the ring.
When the Fight goes to a corner, one judge is on the opposite side. Plus having to look up, sometimes a ring rope Hinders vision...especially for body punches.
I've been 2nd row before. Great view when the fight is on my side. Not so much so on the other side.
Maybe this is goofy..but I would place judges on high chairs like in tennis.no obstruction of view.
Ôur sport is the most subjective.our point system is based on Subjective/opinionated scoring.
A hard punch(point) landed can change the score when compared to a lesser or weak punch. I'm not sure this is a good thing.
American football is a great example that proves my point. Just imagine 2 touchdowns scored per team.
Twice...Team one marches 80 yards. Joe Montana style. (10 ) plays short dump passes longest play was 8 yards...scored with a one yard run. Chewed up 40 out of 60 minutes.
I'd see this team as a boxer who threw twice as much..and time of possession is equated to ring General ship, controlling the tempo of the fight./game.
Team two time of possession:20 minutes. Both scores were 80 yards for a single play. This is equivalent to 2 bone breaking shots.
But the sport football didn't negate the other team's score.
So if a boxer throws 100 punches..landed 20 pity pat shots controlling 2 minutes of the round vs their foe who throws 45 Punches landing 15 while snapping their head back ripping his foes eye..controlling only one minute of the round...
He still landed less...I'm supposed to erase what occurred the first two minutes???
If a Fighter lands more, he should be credited with it.
Because we add subjective criteria effective punching...
Ring General ship..trying to separate clean punches from partially blocked...
Even though WE ALL have seen fights where a partially blocked shot has a greater impact then a clean shot...Because that fighter wasn't blessed with power.
Sorry for the rant...I guess I'm trying to say..we kill our own ability to properly score a fight when we add on something other than shots landed.
I think it was Kellerman that said the way he judged a round is which guy he would rather be at the end of it. Simple but makes sense to me.
In theory I agree. But I would have to rule against any Joe Calzaghe fight, Pernell Whitaker Fight with that criteria.Quote:
Originally Posted by frasd
Effective punches (hey, y'all that's open to interpretation), is what I continually hear. Some judges get it and some don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
The answer is no.
You have to land point scoring punches even if they are soft like Floyd's or Calzaghe.
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by beenKOedEffective punches (hey, y'all that's open to interpretation), is what I continually hear. Some judges get it and some don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by greynotsoold
Both Floyd and Calzaghe developed that pitty patter style due to hand injuries in order to preserve their careers.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamitaLmfao speaking of pity patters, Calzaghe comes to mind.. he looked so funny when throwing those pity pat slap combos .. just looks so girly ..Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
I cant believe that same girly combo got him a stoppage victory over manfredo.. that was just criminal.
But they both didn't win rounds because of their pitty patter punches, they won rounds because they didn't get hit as much as their opponent as well. I mean, who would you give a round to? The 1st guy who threw 120 punches and landed with say 50 pitty patter punchers and 10 with a bit more substance, or the 2nd guy who throws 30 punches and lands with about 2?
That's why Floyd and Calzaghe won fights. Because they were better!
Love the idea. They appear on a close up have to look into the camera while their score is on the bottom of the screen.... we'll know who got their pockets lined too...Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
"Ladies and Gentlemen we have a split decision.....and Judge (Insert name)
Attachment 3718
has scored the bout..... "
Jim "Bang....Bang....Bang" Lampley says yes it does