Page 2 of 2

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 20 Oct 2009, 09:53
by Lenny
Terry D wrote:No offence but the punch stats are open to error. I don't really trust PN's. I also think he needs to get his leg over a bit more often instead of doing this type of thing. Put all that nutritional value to good use.

Again no offence here but the phrase, "I'll have to see the punch stats" usually means "I haven't got a nun's fanny how to score a fight so I need the stats to help me out."
How did people cope before punch stats became available?

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 21 Oct 2009, 08:12
by JDC
If punch stats become important criteria in judging fights then the pro game would be the same as the amatures, just no headgear

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 21 Oct 2009, 16:20
by crusader
JDC wrote:If punch stats become important criteria in judging fights then the pro game would be the same as the amatures, just no headgear

Well generally I'd say how many punches a fighter lands is important

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 21 Oct 2009, 17:26
by Asterix
crusader wrote:
JDC wrote:If punch stats become important criteria in judging fights then the pro game would be the same as the amatures, just no headgear
Well generally I'd say how many punches a fighter lands is important
Of course, but it can't be the sole criteria, which I think may have been the point JDC was trying to get across.

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 21 Oct 2009, 17:36
by crusader
Asterix wrote:
crusader wrote:
JDC wrote:If punch stats become important criteria in judging fights then the pro game would be the same as the amatures, just no headgear
Well generally I'd say how many punches a fighter lands is important
Of course, but it can't be the sole criteria, which I think may have been the point JDC was trying to get across.
Well all he said was important criteria. Sure the amount of punches landed shouldn't the only criteria used to judge a fight, but it is certainly an important aspect when there is a relatively large variance in each fighters connects.

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 21 Oct 2009, 20:48
by BroughtonRulesRefuge
crusader wrote: Well all he said was important criteria. Sure the amount of punches landed shouldn't the only criteria used to judge a fight, but it is certainly an important aspect when there is a relatively large variance in each fighters connects.
- Nah, the point he made was that most on the thread don't know the amount of landed punches much less the definition of a landed punch.

What you need is your steak bits pureed and spoon fed to you by a big company who may buy horse parts, chicken parts, pig parts or hamster parts and call them pureed steak bits for all the hungry Baby Hueys wailing for their pabulum.

So, HBO made up their pureed number bits for the new soft gameboys attracted to their shows and now we have new businesses producing pureed number bits for all the broadcasters to hand out.

Boxing is for men to settle amongst themselves, so gameboys should stick to their computer games and produce a gazillion punchstats for all boxing cares.

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 22 Oct 2009, 01:11
by crusader
BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:
crusader wrote: Well all he said was important criteria. Sure the amount of punches landed shouldn't the only criteria used to judge a fight, but it is certainly an important aspect when there is a relatively large variance in each fighters connects.
- Nah, the point he made was that most on the thread don't know the amount of landed punches much less the definition of a landed punch.

What you need is your steak bits pureed and spoon fed to you by a big company who may buy horse parts, chicken parts, pig parts or hamster parts and call them pureed steak bits for all the hungry Baby Hueys wailing for their pabulum.

So, HBO made up their pureed number bits for the new soft gameboys attracted to their shows and now we have new businesses producing pureed number bits for all the broadcasters to hand out.

Boxing is for men to settle amongst themselves, so gameboys should stick to their computer games and produce a gazillion punchstats for all boxing cares.
Okkkkkkk........ :lol:

Re: Froch Dirrell punch stats?

Posted: 22 Oct 2009, 13:11
by forcefraser
BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:
crusader wrote: Well all he said was important criteria. Sure the amount of punches landed shouldn't the only criteria used to judge a fight, but it is certainly an important aspect when there is a relatively large variance in each fighters connects.
- Nah, the point he made was that most on the thread don't know the amount of landed punches much less the definition of a landed punch.

What you need is your steak bits pureed and spoon fed to you by a big company who may buy horse parts, chicken parts, pig parts or hamster parts and call them pureed steak bits for all the hungry Baby Hueys wailing for their pabulum.

So, HBO made up their pureed number bits for the new soft gameboys attracted to their shows and now we have new businesses producing pureed number bits for all the broadcasters to hand out.

Boxing is for men to settle amongst themselves, so gameboys should stick to their computer games and produce a gazillion punchstats for all boxing cares.
I think I met you once.

I was in Broadmoor from 2006-2009. Extra special wing. Surely you remember me?