Frampton Quigg scoring.

[erics44]

I reckon there were 2 rounds where quigg didn't throw a punch

There should be something in the rules saying you need to throw at least 1 punch in a round otherwise its a 10-8 round

if there isn't already

[Fenster]

There's no way there was a round where Quigg literally didn't throw a punch.

[Fenster]

Awful tactics. Bet he's kicking himself today



Frampton-Quigg: CompuBox Breaks Down Their Punch Stats - Boxing News

[erics44]

10 punches in the first? pretty lame

[erics44]

he landed 2 in total in the first 3 rounds

most of his punches at that time were thrown without any real intent to land

[Fenster]

You should ignore what punches "landed" when looking at these stats. You can count what's thrown but it's impossible to get an accurate read on what landed.

What those stats do prove though is Frampton was throwing way more punches than Quigg early even though his output was poor too.

[erics44]

when I was watching the fight I didn't think Quigg had landed anything in a number of rounds, i haven't watched it again but 2 punches in the first 3 sounds about right

after the first the commentators were saying theres nothing in the round, neither are landing so its a 10-10

well I was arguing (sat on my couch on my own) that quigg wasn't landing at all and hardly throwing

I think it was watts card had Frampton up by just 1 or 2 up after 7 and then quigg in the lead after 11, I was thinking - what the fuck are you on about Jim

I thought Frampton won the first 7

[Primo Carnera]

You should ignore what punches "landed" when looking at these stats. You can count what's thrown but it's impossible to get an accurate read on what landed.

What those stats do prove though is Frampton was throwing way more punches than Quigg early even though his output was poor too.

You see , this is the problem with Punch stats, they can give a very distorted view . However, if you say ignore punches landed, then you have to ignore the whole fucking lot.
I know what you're saying about an accurate read, but it's not going to be a million miles away.
so if the anomalies are averaged out , it is still the same pattern.
in my book I think the stat for Jabs thrown is of little consequence. Surely the most important stats are Power punches thrown and MOST importantly power punches Landed. Quigg landed half as many again as Frampton.
so some people (not you) want to give a 10-8 round to Frampton where he outpunches Quigg by 3, 4 or 5 punches , but not give a 10-8 for Quigg where he outpunches Frampton by 15?
Overall Quigg out landed Frampton through the course of the fight and his success percentages were better, hence he was more economic and accurate. Does make Quigg a better Boxer?
I have to say that I was pretty stunned by the low percentage accuracy of both fighters . pretty piss poor for 2 "World Champions".
btw, I'm not trying to push my "Quigg won the fight" argument here, just pointing out the value of these stats.

[IamInuit]

I reckon there were 2 rounds where quigg didn't throw a punch

There should be something in the rules saying you need to throw at least 1 punch in a round otherwise its a 10-8 round

if there isn't already

There is no such rule but even if there was you cant call a 10/8 because Quigg threw nothing and Carl threw 2.

If not for the little flare up in spots over the last 5, this fight would have rivaled Wlad/Fury in lack of output.