|
Post by billyc on Nov 11, 2011 4:37:19 GMT -5
Murph...I agree with you...you see it, I see it and most of our listeners see it...but the SAD truth is that the masses DO NOT. Proof is the fact that HBO discusses it DURING every fight of theirs these days. AND....the way they use it...they assume it's FACT. How many times have you heard HBO say something like...I thought so and so landed the harder shots, but CB said otherwise and then they shift their thoughts to that....like I said...take out the human element and then we CAN rely on it.
|
|
|
Post by davemurphy on Nov 15, 2011 22:20:44 GMT -5
I didn't watch Pac-JMM 3 on the HBO feed, but I hear that they were all over the CB stats Saturday Night. Where I get fed up is when Jim Lampley will do exactly what you mention, he'll start to make the case for one guy winning the round and then do a complete about-face when the CB stats pop up and there's a two or three punch edge for the other guy.
|
|
|
Post by billyc on Nov 16, 2011 12:18:01 GMT -5
The bottom line is we (humans) are becoming stupid! We rely on data in our lives...but we also rely on the source. If our computer tells us the fight was good...then I guess it was good. We are not thinking any more...not only boxing either! Boxing is subjective...that is you may think one guy won where I think another. We can both accept that, even after we argue our cases. Why should we be expected to take someone elses subjective view of punches landed, or not, and then base what we are watching on it? Not me brother! When the human element is removed....then we can go by it...assuming its programmed correctly! Until then, its a joke and all we should be doing with it is using it as information only...not fact.
|
|
|
Post by davemurphy on Nov 19, 2011 1:51:40 GMT -5
Well said, Billy C. It's like fast food, some people don't want to have to think for themselves, they want to be able to look at someone posting a number and have it decided for them. Jim Lampley is one of those people that likes to make up people's minds for them (and his own) based on a stat. It's a World of Automated Robots gone mad, and certainly nothing I care to base my scoring on.
|
|
|
Post by billyc on Dec 6, 2011 4:28:54 GMT -5
I had 12 hours to think about this the other day while making it home in time for the Post Cotto-Margarito Fight Now TV show.
Like I said in the past...take the human element out, and we are OK...but for now, the ONLY way I think this is even CLOSE is if we had someone counting ONLY the punches thrown, someone counting the punches landed, someone counting the body shots, someone counting the head shots and someone identifing jabs and power shots. Add it up and you have 5 counters...PER CORNER. That would mean there would be TEN punch counters per fight. This will give us a better count and IMO would be acurate...IF THE COUNTERS KNEW BOXING and DEFENSE.
Lets face it...right now, there are 2 people determining all of above. Two counters that may not know a left-hook from a fish-hook.
The way it is being done now....DOES NOT WORK and I think its a joke that people discuss it as fact when its subjective and what's worse is the BOZOS from HBO call the fight as per the stats, which make them a joke.
EVERY punch is subjective. I for one can't accept that a punch was a power shot, or landed, or not, or whatever just because someone else thinks so...especially when it happens so quickly.
If you think these stats are like "they say"...over 96% correct, then you were slipped some funny kool-aid.
And people say boxing is a joke....I wonder why?
|
|
|
Post by davemurphy on Dec 6, 2011 19:55:46 GMT -5
Compubox quite simply is an experiment that's gone terribly wrong, they gave people too much credit in thinking they'd be able to properly evaluate it against other factors that go into scoring a round (the quality and power of the punches, neither of which it CB accounts for). Even if the accuracy is in the high ninety percent level, connect percentage means little if you don't know the force of the blow.
|
|
|
Post by billyc on Dec 7, 2011 4:32:37 GMT -5
It is worse now Murph because they are calling the fights based on the live stats...so now, instead of calling the action that is taking place in front of them...they talk about "other stuff" then come in and say stuff like...so and so is landing more punches based on CB...and then talk about it. The way it SHOULD be is that they call the fight...then AFTER can talk about the SUBJECTIVE stats from CB and the person(s) who saw it THAT way....that really is what the deal is. We are getting stats based on how someone else viewed the fight.
|
|
|
Post by davemurphy on Dec 7, 2011 16:41:55 GMT -5
It is worse now Murph because they are calling the fights based on the live stats...so now, instead of calling the action that is taking place in front of them...they talk about "other stuff" then come in and say stuff like...so and so is landing more punches based on CB...and then talk about it. The way it SHOULD be is that they call the fight...then AFTER can talk about the SUBJECTIVE stats from CB and the person(s) who saw it THAT way....that really is what the deal is. We are getting stats based on how someone else viewed the fight. I hate to beat on Jim Lamp-post all the time, but I consider him the Ringleader of the CB advocates. I recall one fight within the last year, wish I could remember the exact one since it's a perfect example of what your saying, where Lampley started to make a point about the previous round and then stopped mid-sentence when the CB stats popped up on the screen and seemed to contradict his point (the connects favoring the "wrong guy"). He fell silent for a moment, dropped his point, and tried to bale out with a "how'd you score it, Harold" to get himself out of the hole. Do I REALLY want a commentator that so has little faith in his own judgement? That's like a Lawyer during cross examination asking the court stenographer taking down the words "is that what you got out of his answer?" ;D
|
|
|
Post by billyc on Dec 8, 2011 4:31:32 GMT -5
It all goes back to what Nick Charles said. AND mind you....I don't think he was the greatest commentator of all time, but he said it BEST when he said a good boxing commentator calls what's going on in front of them....that's it. No more, no less.
He was right and the HBO boys....and even the ShoBox guys during the last show (Mares-Agbeko II) discuss the stats while the fight is going on. That's BS.
|
|
|
Post by Davema on Dec 9, 2011 11:38:37 GMT -5
"a good boxing commentator calls what's going on in front of them....that's it. No more, no less."
exactly
|
|
|
Post by davemurphy on Dec 10, 2011 6:14:11 GMT -5
It all goes back to what Nick Charles said. AND mind you....I don't think he was the greatest commentator of all time, but he said it BEST when he said a good boxing commentator calls what's going on in front of them....that's it. No more, no less. He was right and the HBO boys....and even the ShoBox guys during the last show (Mares-Agbeko II) discuss the stats while the fight is going on. That's BS. BC- Agreed, Nick knew his limitations and the boundaries not to cross, you have a fight to describe and an analyst to add expert perspective. He never tried to be something he wasn't, whereas Jim Lamp-post has been trying to do that since he took over for Barry Tompkins in 1988. I think a lot of the problem came from his being an understudy for Cosell when he started at ABC as a Production assistant and making Howard his role model....but even Howard knew you do the basic blow-by-blow as the groundwork and he was working solo most of the time. I think it had a lot to do with Ego (or lack of it). When Nick Charles signed my glove at HOF several years back, he wrote "Showtime" under his name, he knew his place and that he wasn't the attraction.
|
|
|
Post by billyc on Dec 10, 2011 10:15:51 GMT -5
Exactly...just like a ref or the three blind mice...I mean judges....the fight should be about the two fighters...that's it. One wins....and AFTER the fight...talk about all the stats, woulda-coulda and Shouldas then....not DURING.
|
|
|
Post by Londonerryan on Dec 12, 2011 10:45:12 GMT -5
Compubox has never bothered me because i've never paid any attention to it during fights and i don't see it as an accurate depiction of the fight. However, in the recent Pacquiao vs Marquez III fight, it was wayyyy off the mark. I've copy/pasted the following from what i wrote about that fight. This is what i wrote regarding round 7: Round 7: Marquez 10-9. Very close round which i watched 3 times (mainly to make heads or tails of the RIDICULOUS Compubox stats) but i feel Marquez won it fairly. He landed the best punch of the fight so far in the first minute, a big right hook followed up with a couple of body shots. Compubox is truly showing its incompetence here. I am sitting here with as much time on my hands as possible and the chance to replay the round over again. I counted 9 effective punches landed by Pacquiao to 11 landed by Marquez. They counted 21 punches to 12. 21 punches? ? They MUST be off their heads on crack! They just MUST be. Surprisingly even HBO gave the round to Marquez despite their beloved Compubox scoring air punches for Pacquiao.
|
|
|
Post by davemurphy on Dec 14, 2011 22:05:17 GMT -5
Compubox has never bothered me because i've never paid any attention to it during fights and i don't see it as an accurate depiction of the fight. However, in the recent Pacquiao vs Marquez III fight, it was wayyyy off the mark. I've copy/pasted the following from what i wrote about that fight. This is what i wrote regarding round 7: Round 7: Marquez 10-9. Very close round which i watched 3 times (mainly to make heads or tails of the RIDICULOUS Compubox stats) but i feel Marquez won it fairly. He landed the best punch of the fight so far in the first minute, a big right hook followed up with a couple of body shots. Compubox is truly showing its incompetence here. I am sitting here with as much time on my hands as possible and the chance to replay the round over again. I counted 9 effective punches landed by Pacquiao to 11 landed by Marquez. They counted 21 punches to 12. 21 punches? ? They MUST be off their heads on crack! They just MUST be. Surprisingly even HBO gave the round to Marquez despite their beloved Compubox scoring air punches for Pacquiao. Unfortunately, you've pointed to the one exception that HBO has made over God knows how many years where they've used their own two eyes over the numbers. I think part of the problem is that these three guys are so busy babbling about everything else connected to the sport BESIDES the fight that they aren't even paying attention TO the fight, so they're looking for some kind of ready-made Statistic that saves them from having to pay attention.........Compu-box fits that role perfectly.
|
|