BoxRec

http://www.BS.com/golovkin-vs- ... ts--114756

Punch Stats
PUNCHES GOLOVKIN JACOBS
Landed 231 175
Thrown 615 541
Percent 38% 32%
-- Courtesy of CompuBox

That doesn't surprise me. A fair bit of what Jacobs threw either landed on gloves or didn't land at all.

GGG won fair and square.

The never wrong compubox huh...

i had jacobs winning but after looking at the compubox number i understand why ...

jacobs domninated in the power punch: 8 round out of 12 144/371, 126/259 for GGG

but GGG was WAY more dominated in the jabs: 12 round out of 12 105/356, ONLY 31/170 FOR JACOBS


CONCLUSION: i got impressed more by the power punch than the jab so maybe people who had jacobs winning had the same mentality but at the end
when you had up all the punches; power punch and jabs;

GGG 231/615
JACOBS 175/541

some people (like me) gave power punch more effectiveness... but at the end it was a FANTASTIC fight.

Barry Jones scoring on allegedly was horrendous.

I scored 116-112 giving the 2nd round even. The only round I differed with the judges was that 2nd and the 7th. Barry Jones had Jacobs ahead , I had Golovkin 7 rounds up after 9.

Anyone who thought Jacobs won that needs to go to specsavers or forget listining to commentary.

That aside is was a good fight and Jacobs gave him his toughest test.

how are these numbers arrived at ? real time counting of punches or watching the fight in slow mo later on ? having watched the fight livce and watched golovkin do nothing apart from walk forward for much of the later rounds i can't see how they arrive at these numbers for this fight.

I was rooting for GGG but I thought that Jacobs won. I saw GGG doing his stalking thing a lot but none of his trademark machine gun punches. I'm surprised that so many think he won. I should rewatch the fight paying more attention to GGG's jabs.

When other fighters jab their way to victory, this board screams about power shots.
When GGG jabs his way to victory.

i thought GGG landed more in general and more power punches. However, Jacobs made it a very close contest. I wanted Jacobs to win mind.

from wikipedia:

CompuBox's purpose is to settle controversies surrounding fights by counting each punch thrown by each of the fighters, and also each punch landed, to provide fight viewers with a final punchstat count and a perception of who should ideally be given the judges' decision, in the cases where a fight lasts the full distance.

The system calls for two operators. Each operator watches one of the two fighters and has access to four keys, corresponding to jab connect, jab miss, power punch connect, and power punch miss. The operators key in the different punches as they happen, collecting punch counts and hit percentages along the way.

CompuBox is used by HBO, NBC and ESPN. Former world champion Genaro Hernandez was one of the men in charge of operating the system.

bbb636 wrote:from wikipedia:

CompuBox's purpose is to settle controversies surrounding fights by counting each punch thrown by each of the fighters, and also each punch landed, to provide fight viewers with a final punchstat count and a perception of who should ideally be given the judges' decision, in the cases where a fight lasts the full distance.

The system calls for two operators. Each operator watches one of the two fighters and has access to four keys, corresponding to jab connect, jab miss, power punch connect, and power punch miss. The operators key in the different punches as they happen, collecting punch counts and hit percentages along the way.

CompuBox is used by HBO, NBC and ESPN. Former world champion Genaro Hernandez was one of the men in charge of operating the system.

So in the end it's just the opinions of two guys pressing buttons during the fight.

To do this sort of thing relibably you'd need someone imperation to watch it slowed down at all different angles

95gerog wrote:i thought GGG landed more in general and more power punches. However, Jacobs made it a very close contest. I wanted Jacobs to win mind.

I also didn't see Jacobs actually landing many power punches.

Boxing Prospect wrote:The never wrong compubox huh...

It is right a whole lot more often than it is wrong

I get a laugh out of people who claim the punch counts are wrong when they haven't even bothered to do their own count.

I don't think they are wrong.......just not all that important. This isn't amateur boxing. It's about more than just adding up the landed punches.

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:When other fighters jab their way to victory, this board screams about power shots.
When GGG jabs his way to victory.

A jab, in my mind, is only worth something, points wise, if it's used as a means to break down an opponent and is such thrown with some authority. If it's used as a "stay away from me" tactic or to obfuscate an oncoming power shot, then the jab itself shouldn't be scoring points save for what comes after it.

Like a Boss wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:The never wrong compubox huh...

It is right a whole lot more often than it is wrong

I get a laugh out of people who claim the punch counts are wrong when they haven't even bothered to do their own count.

So you've taken the time to count on your own a large enough group of fights to definitively say they're more right than wrong? I wouldn't bother, but I'd be shocked there has ever been a fight with completely accurate punch stats. It has no bearing on the sport, but the running tally and totals lead to annoying internet card arguments.

If you think they are accurate just watch Angulo vs Kirkland round 1, compare your count to the compubox one...

Where do they count them? Ringside? At home? At compubox headquarters? Any of the above leaves tons of reasons why they suck. Not to mention the fact that at the conclusion of mist every round you see a sliwmo of a clean shot you missed or a missed shot you thought was clean. They offer nothing of value, just a thing for tv.

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:When other fighters jab their way to victory, this board screams about power shots.
When GGG jabs his way to victory.

Make sure and look for conspiracies where none exist! I blame manly capitalists for this offensive result!

Pathetic.

I backed GGG but he got beat that's all I will say and one more thing I like keeping it real Jacobs the best Middleweight on the planet as of yesterday

ldlamb wrote:I don't think they are wrong.......just not all that important. This isn't amateur boxing. It's about more than just adding up the landed punches.

Exacly this boss guy only dribbling because of the Green v Mundine and compubox

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:The never wrong compubox huh...

It is right a whole lot more often than it is wrong

I get a laugh out of people who claim the punch counts are wrong when they haven't even bothered to do their own count.

So you've taken the time to count on your own a large enough group of fights to definitively say they're more right than wrong? I wouldn't bother, but I'd be shocked there has ever been a fight with completely accurate punch stats. It has no bearing on the sport, but the running tally and totals lead to annoying internet card arguments.

Punches landed has no bearing on the sport?

Punches landed in each round has a big bearing on who wins that round, and winning rounds is how you accumulate more points than your opponent. That's why the complete Compu-Box report is laid out round by round.

Is Compu-Box absolutely definitive to the result? No it isn't. But it a pretty good guide and I rate it a long way ahead of those who get on here and argue every result.

Like a Boss wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:
It is right a whole lot more often than it is wrong

I get a laugh out of people who claim the punch counts are wrong when they haven't even bothered to do their own count.

So you've taken the time to count on your own a large enough group of fights to definitively say they're more right than wrong? I wouldn't bother, but I'd be shocked there has ever been a fight with completely accurate punch stats. It has no bearing on the sport, but the running tally and totals lead to annoying internet card arguments.

Punches landed has no bearing on the sport?

Punches landed in each round has a big bearing on who wins the round, and winning rounds is how you accumulate more points than your opponent.

Nice diversion.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: So you've taken the time to count on your own a large enough group of fights to definitively say they're more right than wrong? I wouldn't bother, but I'd be shocked there has ever been a fight with completely accurate punch stats. It has no bearing on the sport, but the running tally and totals lead to annoying internet card arguments.

Punches landed has no bearing on the sport?

Punches landed in each round has a big bearing on who wins the round, and winning rounds is how you accumulate more points than your opponent.

Nice diversion.

Is Compu-Box absolutely definitive to the result? No it isn't. But it a pretty good guide and I rate it a long way ahead of those who get on here and argue every result. Often either without having watched the fight, or if they have watched it, without actually scoring it round by round.