Errol Spence vs. Shawn Porter - CompuBox By The Numbers

[Ruthless-RKO]

By CompuBox

COMPUBOX BY THE NUMBERS

3 - jabs landed per round by Spence after landing 7 per round in his previous 6 fights (welter avg.: 5)

7 - number of rounds in which Spencer & Porter were within 4 connects of each other
(Thurman & Porter were within 5 connects of each other in 10 of 12 rounds in their fight)

9.4 - body shots landed per round by Spence, double the CompuBox avg.

26 - punches landed by Spence in round 12, his high for the fight

26 - punches landed by Porter in round 4, most by a Spence opponent

41% - time spent in close range by Spence-Porter after Porter spent just 17% of the Ugas fight at close range (according to CompuTrack)

44 - power punches thrown per round by Porter vs. Spence after throwing 37 per round in his previous 10 fights, #1 among top tier welterweights

51% - pct. of Spence's landed punches that were to body of Porter (CompuBox Avg. : 29.5%)

62 - punches thrown per round by Porter after averaging 52 per round in his previous 10 fights (welter avg.: 57)

62 - punches thrown per round by Spence after averaging 72 per round in his previous 6 fight

88 - punches thrown by Spence in round 12, his high for the fight

90 - punches thrown by Porter in round 4, most by a Spence opponent

113 - body shots landed by Spence, a career high

172 - punches landed by Porter in the fight, most by a Spence opponent

744 - punches thrown by Porter in the fight, most by a Spence opponent

WHAT WE LEARNED:

• Porter took away Spence’s jab with effective feinting and foot work.

• Porter has now lost razor thin decisions to Spence (they were within 4 connects of each other in 7 of 12 rounds) & Thurman (they were within 5 connects of each other in 10 of 12 rounds).

• Porter is WAY more effective at close range, as 41% of Porter-Spence was fought inside resulting in 172 landed punches by Porter. Just 17% of Porter-Ugas was spend at close range, resulting in just 144 landed punches by Porter.

• Spence’s body attack was the difference in this fight, he landed nearly 10 per round and half his landed punches were to the body of Porter.

• Spence rallied late with the fight in the balance, landing 23 of 80 punches in rounds 11 & 12.

• Needless to say, Porter was Spence’s toughest opponent to date, landing 172 punches, most by a Spence opponent.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Some interesting information.

[Bandog]

By CompuBox

COMPUBOX BY THE NUMBERS

3 - jabs landed per round by Spence after landing 7 per round in his previous 6 fights (welter avg.: 5)

7 - number of rounds in which Spencer & Porter were within 4 connects of each other
(Thurman & Porter were within 5 connects of each other in 10 of 12 rounds in their fight)

9.4 - body shots landed per round by Spence, double the CompuBox avg.

26 - punches landed by Spence in round 12, his high for the fight

26 - punches landed by Porter in round 4, most by a Spence opponent

41% - time spent in close range by Spence-Porter after Porter spent just 17% of the Ugas fight at close range (according to CompuTrack)

44 - power punches thrown per round by Porter vs. Spence after throwing 37 per round in his previous 10 fights, #1 among top tier welterweights

51% - pct. of Spence's landed punches that were to body of Porter (CompuBox Avg. : 29.5%)

62 - punches thrown per round by Porter after averaging 52 per round in his previous 10 fights (welter avg.: 57)

62 - punches thrown per round by Spence after averaging 72 per round in his previous 6 fight

88 - punches thrown by Spence in round 12, his high for the fight

90 - punches thrown by Porter in round 4, most by a Spence opponent

113 - body shots landed by Spence, a career high

172 - punches landed by Porter in the fight, most by a Spence opponent

744 - punches thrown by Porter in the fight, most by a Spence opponent

WHAT WE LEARNED:

• Porter took away Spence’s jab with effective feinting and foot work.

• Porter has now lost razor thin decisions to Spence (they were within 4 connects of each other in 7 of 12 rounds) & Thurman (they were within 5 connects of each other in 10 of 12 rounds).

• Porter is WAY more effective at close range, as 41% of Porter-Spence was fought inside resulting in 172 landed punches by Porter. Just 17% of Porter-Ugas was spend at close range, resulting in just 144 landed punches by Porter.

• Spence’s body attack was the difference in this fight, he landed nearly 10 per round and half his landed punches were to the body of Porter.

• Spence rallied late with the fight in the balance, landing 23 of 80 punches in rounds 11 & 12.

• Needless to say, Porter was Spence’s toughest opponent to date, landing 172 punches, most by a Spence opponent.

Needless to say, Spence was Porter's toughest opponent to date, and I'm guessing had the most landed by a Porter opponent, but you left that out. Compubox numbers are legit and make a difference when you want them to.

[dagilechia]

compubox stats are bullśhit, almost always wrong and almost always favour the A side fighter

[Impractical Poster]

You forgot to show the percentage of nut shots Spence landed on Porter.

[Impractical Poster]

By CompuBox

COMPUBOX BY THE NUMBERS

3 - jabs landed per round by Spence after landing 7 per round in his previous 6 fights (welter avg.: 5)

7 - number of rounds in which Spencer & Porter were within 4 connects of each other
(Thurman & Porter were within 5 connects of each other in 10 of 12 rounds in their fight)

9.4 - body shots landed per round by Spence, double the CompuBox avg.

26 - punches landed by Spence in round 12, his high for the fight

26 - punches landed by Porter in round 4, most by a Spence opponent

41% - time spent in close range by Spence-Porter after Porter spent just 17% of the Ugas fight at close range (according to CompuTrack)

44 - power punches thrown per round by Porter vs. Spence after throwing 37 per round in his previous 10 fights, #1 among top tier welterweights

51% - pct. of Spence's landed punches that were to body of Porter (CompuBox Avg. : 29.5%)

62 - punches thrown per round by Porter after averaging 52 per round in his previous 10 fights (welter avg.: 57)

62 - punches thrown per round by Spence after averaging 72 per round in his previous 6 fight

88 - punches thrown by Spence in round 12, his high for the fight

90 - punches thrown by Porter in round 4, most by a Spence opponent

113 - body shots landed by Spence, a career high

172 - punches landed by Porter in the fight, most by a Spence opponent

744 - punches thrown by Porter in the fight, most by a Spence opponent

WHAT WE LEARNED:

• Porter took away Spence’s jab with effective feinting and foot work.

• Porter has now lost razor thin decisions to Spence (they were within 4 connects of each other in 7 of 12 rounds) & Thurman (they were within 5 connects of each other in 10 of 12 rounds).

• Porter is WAY more effective at close range, as 41% of Porter-Spence was fought inside resulting in 172 landed punches by Porter. Just 17% of Porter-Ugas was spend at close range, resulting in just 144 landed punches by Porter.

• Spence’s body attack was the difference in this fight, he landed nearly 10 per round and half his landed punches were to the body of Porter.

• Spence rallied late with the fight in the balance, landing 23 of 80 punches in rounds 11 & 12.

• Needless to say, Porter was Spence’s toughest opponent to date, landing 172 punches, most by a Spence opponent.

Needless to say, Spence was Porter's toughest opponent to date, and I'm guessing had the most landed by a Porter opponent, but you left that out. Compubox numbers are legit and make a difference when you want them to.

I think you have the names mixed up Dog.

[margaret thatcher]

Kell Brook still did the best at negating Porter

[gilgamesh]

Kell Brook still did the best at negating Porter

I didn't watch Spence vs Porter yet, but from all the feedback that would seem to be accurate. I don't really recall anybody questioning Brook's win in the slightest.

[margaret thatcher]

I think of Porter's 3 losses, if you try to score them for him the Brook fight is the one where most clearly you are scoring for the ineffective puncher of the two. He was defused pretty good that night and the only way you score that for him is if you wanted him to win.

[Duran1970]

compubox stats are bullśhit, almost always wrong and almost always favour the A side fighter

X2
College geeks who've never had a fight in their life sitting in a trailer pushing buttons that don't even know the difference between an uppercut and a hook..
I hate how these numbers are forced fed to the viewers every fight that's aired..as if a fighter must've won a round by outlanding his opponent 7-5... amateurish scoring

[Ruthless-RKO]

I hate how these numbers are forced fed to the viewers every fight that's aired..as if a fighter must've won a round by outlanding his opponent 7-5... amateurish scoring

Anyone that thinks like that is just plain stupid..

[Onetimeonly]

I hate how these numbers are forced fed to the viewers every fight that's aired..as if a fighter must've won a round by outlanding his opponent 7-5... amateurish scoring

Anyone that thinks like that is just plain stupid..

This board is loaded with them. He just described the master class fury put on wilder.

[james5000+]

Kell Brook still did the best at negating Porter

I didn't watch Spence vs Porter yet, but from all the feedback that would seem to be accurate. I don't really recall anybody questioning Brook's win in the slightest.

Well for a starter the Skysports commentary had Porter beating Brook LOL and they are notorious nut huggers to their own fighters.

A lot of people I recall thought Porter won at the time, these days I think a lot of fans just look at the decision on Boxrec and haven't even seen the fight.


Brook was pretty much an under dog so the fact it was razor thin close and you could give it to him mean he did exceptionally.

Spence was expected to whitewash Porter and since Porter won multiple rounds off him Spence is a hype job LOL

Spence won easier without the KD, with the KD it should be very clear

[margaret thatcher]

Doesn't matter what any commentator said (USA commentators had it for Brook if we are comparing). Brook handled Porter and pretty much defused him. Clear 8-4 type of win and got the decision in the USA. If anyone scored that for Porter then LOL, total example of being a sucker for ineffective flailing.

[james5000+]

Doesn't matter what any commentator said, Brook handled Porter and pretty much defused him. Clear 8-4 type of win and got the decision in the USA. If anyone scored that for Porter then LOL, total example of being a sucker for ineffective flailing.

When someone claims nobody doubted the result it does matter.

Porter was basically all over Brook like a rash. No doubt Brook landed a lot of eye catching punches but he was out worked for a lot of the fight.

Spence landed more and landed the more eye catching punches and got the KD

Spence also whooped Brooks ass

[margaret thatcher]

Porter hardly landed anything clean at all, his biggest output was throwing inaccurate wild flailing shots from poor distances (too far or smothering himself). Very clear win for Brook and was never really in much bother. If someone wants to argue he didn't deserve it, they are easily conned by ineffective aggresion, which was basically the big bulk of Porter's attack.

Of course Spence beat Porter clear too and beat Brook as well as the superior fighter, has nothing to do with how Porter vs Brook went as should be obvious, different fights.

[gilgamesh]

Doesn't matter what any commentator said, Brook handled Porter and pretty much defused him. Clear 8-4 type of win and got the decision in the USA. If anyone scored that for Porter then LOL, total example of being a sucker for ineffective flailing.

When someone claims nobody doubted the result it does matter.

Porter was basically all over Brook like a rash. No doubt Brook landed a lot of eye catching punches but he was out worked for a lot of the fight.

Spence landed more and landed the more eye catching punches and got the KD

Spence also whooped Brooks ass

Well it was a Split Decision so it's obvious SOMEBODY doubted the result, but I never have.

[margaret thatcher]

Spence - Porter was split, Brook-Porter was majority. Both were clear losses for Shawn though.

Funny enough the one UD loss Porter has was the one he was most competitive in I thought.

[Bandog]

Needless to say, Spence was Porter's toughest opponent to date, and I'm guessing had the most landed by a Porter opponent, but you left that out. Compubox numbers are legit and make a difference when you want them to.

I think you have the names mixed up Dog.

No. The whole post is about how Porter was Spence's best opponent, and basically nothing about Spence being Porter's best opponent.