Does total punch output mean you should win the fight?

[greynotsoold]

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.

I think that they count every 'non-jab as a "power" shot. And how do you weigh a guy rolling with punches?
I'm not a big fan of making boxing a statistical endeavor.

[FinitoElDinamita]

Hell naw punch output dont mean shit to me unless the other guy isnt throwing anything..

Effective aggression and clean punching over high workrate..

[Bo-Bo24]

Hell naw punch output dont mean shit to me unless the other guy isnt throwing anything..

Effective aggression and clean punching over high workrate..

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.

[ykdadamaja]

Word.

[boyla]

Everything in life is about how effective it is.
Judging will always be biased to your personal opinion.

Quality>Quantity

[p4pking]

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.

[Spicoli]

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".

[IamInuit]

Everything in life is about how effective it is.
Judging will always be biased to your personal opinion.

Quality>Quantity

Often times the two of those are confused.

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.