Can we all agree to stop using Compubox stats to score fights?

[arcanum26]

We all (I hope) understand the concept that boxing is scored round by round, not as a whole. That it's about who wins the most rounds, not who lands the most punches in a fight. But yet we still refer to the overall punch stats for some reason.

This would appear to be a weakness with Compubox. But after Pac-Bradley, I noticed journalists quoting not only the total Compubox stats, but the round by round breakdown. Apparently, Bradley outlanded Pac in only one round (and tied him in another). You can see the breakdown here:

CompuBox Stats: Bradley W 12 Pacquaio | CompuBox

This strikes me as very helpful. Of course, they are not measuring the effectiveness of the punch, but in the fight in question, that was not an issue.

We know PacMan hit Bradley harder than vice versa. So the most effective justification for picking Bradley would be that he landed more punches in more rounds. Short of that, one might want to argue that landing at a more efficient rate demonstrates superior ringmanship.

Compubox actually supplies this data. It may not be perfect and it certainly does not replace watching the fight, but it does appear to be a valuable tool. In this case, since no one seriously argues that Bradley's punches were harder, Compubox does a good job demasking the official judges.

Agree completely, Manju. The point being raised in the Pac Bradley fight is not only the disparity of the number of total punches landed, but also the disparity in the number of punches landed on a round by round basis.

In round 7 for example, Compubox had Pac landing 27 punches out of 77 thrown, with Tim 11 of 67 yet the 3 judges scored the round unanimously for Tim. I find that in this particular case, Compubox is a good way to gauge the inaccuracies in how the judges saw the round, short of personally watching the round in super slow mo and counting the number thrown and landed by each fighter.

Granted, Compubox isn't an exact science and anyone who would use it to argue who won close rounds isn't entirely wise for doing so, but when there's a huge gap in numbers shown, then I see no reason why we need to stop using it to score such rounds. Improve it, but don't take it away entirely.

[Manju]

In round 7 for example, Compubox had Pac landing 27 punches out of 77 thrown, with Tim 11 of 67 yet the 3 judges scored the round unanimously for Tim. I find that in this particular case, Compubox is a good way to gauge the inaccuracies in how the judges saw the round, short of personally watching the round in super slow mo and counting the number thrown and landed by each fighter.

This is a good example of how to use Compubox. Along similar lines, Duane Ford defended his scorecard by saying; "Pacquiao missed a lot of punches and I thought he was throwing wildly."

But Compubox reveals that Bradley actually missed at a higher rate than PacMan in every round but one.

CompuBox Stats: Bradley W 12 Pacquaio | CompuBox

The decision cannot even be justified on the one metric that Ford singles out as Bradley's strength. If this were an honest mistake, I suspect that the judges were judging PacMan against himself. In other words, Bradley may have made Pac miss at a higher rate than say Hatton did. This impressed the judges. They just forgot all about the other side of the equation.

Interestingly, Compubox does a minute by minute breakdown of each round:

Pacquaio’s Landed Punches – Minute-by-Minute | CompuBox

They then speculate as to why this might have affected the judges' judgment. Good data to have, imo.

[hardcore_crash]

I don't understand the hate on compubox it's just a tool to determine how much punches were thrown and landed?

I think everyone understands it doesnt measure the effectiveness of the strike.

[TitoFan]

I don't understand the hate on compubox it's just a tool to determine how much punches were thrown and landed?

I think everyone understands it doesnt measure the effectiveness of the strike.

You'd be surprised....

[captainanddew]

I don't understand the hate on compubox it's just a tool to determine how much punches were thrown and landed?

I think everyone understands it doesnt measure the effectiveness of the strike.

very true. But how many effective strikes did Bradley land

you can't judge a round by saying Fighter A landed 12 punches and fighter B landed 11 punches. How effective were those punches. Did any of them stun, hurt, or just back up the other fighter.

Similarly if fighter A is landing 10 punches but they are hard clean shots and fighter B lands 22 punches but he isn't doing any damage, then you can't just think Fighter B clearly won that round.

But when Pac lands 2 to 2.5 as many punches as Bradley in a round, the punches are harder, Bradley is backing up when Pac lands punches, and Bradley's punches are not having any effect, then I don't understand what a judge giving Bradley the round was watching.

This wasn't the case of one guy landing alot of punches versus a power puncher landing less shots but harder shots. This was a case of the lighter punching guy landing fewer punches getting hit more and backed up by the much harder hitter.

[hardcore_crash]

I didn't see much punches landing cleanly from Bradley, besides some jabs.
I completely agree on the other points.

[NoBias]

i'll say it again its totally out of order on bradley he trained his heart off, and every MF is saying he lost me included, but what can he do, you think pac feels bad this guy must feel worse.

i would hate to be seen as a winner in a supposed fixed fight that had nothing to do with me

[Gandalf]

Yes, compubox sucks. It has taken time for me to see, but the evolution of my thought process is done. Compubox is a poor barometer of landed blows. Much of it seems to be on the spot guesswork and ends up biased.

[miron_lang]

I think its accurate.


its a lot more accurate than letting 70 yrs old judge a round by themselves.


its easier to see landed shots compared to all the other things judges think about like


Ring Generalship
Defense
the weight on Power shots and landing more shots.


compubox take out the subjectivity.

[fan johnny]

To use compubox or not? Since it is not part of the official scoring, I can't see where it is a negative. People are just using it to try and back up a point. So more than likely, those that don't like it, are probably on the opposite side of the punch stats and therefor attack it as being bad.

[miron_lang]

To use compubox or not? Since it is not part of the official scoring, I can't see where it is a negative. People are just using it to try and back up a point. So more than likely, those that don't like it, are probably on the opposite side of the punch stats and therefor attack it as being bad.

It can also be a good confirmation or validator. at least 90% of the time compubox confirms the official judges decision.

[ninjaspy3]

To use compubox or not? Since it is not part of the official scoring, I can't see where it is a negative. People are just using it to try and back up a point. So more than likely, those that don't like it, are probably on the opposite side of the punch stats and therefor attack it as being bad.

It can also be a good confirmation or validator. at least 90% of the time compubox confirms the official judges decision.

Is that an official statistic?

[miron_lang]

Is that an official statistic?

just my estimate