Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: CompuBox Statistical Leaders - 2015 Review, Breakdown

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by Psylence83 View Post
    Alright i'm gonna run the risk of pulling a javi here. It says floyd lands 16 out of 35 punches.....which is close enough to 46%???....right. Opponent connect % is 25%.....wouldn't that give floyd a +/- of 21?????

    Where did i go wrong here lol?
    If you closely read the table, you will see that they don't provide with all the numbers that you would need in order to calculate the +/- ratio by yourself... so, you have to trust their 'word'...

    Comment


      #22
      Slippery motherfu@kers.....

      Comment


        #23
        Originally posted by Psylence83 View Post
        Slippery motherfu@kers.....
        But if you really want to calculate Floyd's +/- ratio, you should look for the Floyd's Compubox stats related to his 2 fights in 2015... and you would be able to get the exact percentage...

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by Psylence83 View Post
          Alright i'm gonna run the risk of pulling a javi here. It says floyd lands 16 out of 35 punches.....which is close enough to 46%???....right. Opponent connect % is 25%.....wouldn't that give floyd a +/- of 21?????

          Where did i go wrong here lol?
          Yeah but in that table the OPC is for power punches not overall punches. So Floyd's opponent's % must be 19%. It would've made more sense for them to include that stat.

          Comment


            #25
            its pretty funny to see people making plus minus charts and all this stuff when the original data is nowhere near accurate. that's usually the first step. get accurate data. then you can proceed to other breakdowns and make accurate comparisons. then again some people like the data that already exists because it fits into their agenda perfectly. some people don't like to question things because they already have the answer that they want.

            Comment


              #26
              Originally posted by daggum View Post
              its pretty funny to see people making plus minus charts and all this stuff when the original data is nowhere near accurate. That's usually the first step. Get accurate data. Then you can proceed to other breakdowns and make accurate comparisons. Then again some people like the data that already exists because it fits into their agenda perfectly. Some people don't like to question things because they already have the answer that they want.
              gigo ....................................

              Comment


                #27
                LOL, that Jacobs difference might be only from the Quillin fight.

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by daggum View Post
                  its pretty funny to see people making plus minus charts and all this stuff when the original data is nowhere near accurate. that's usually the first step. get accurate data. then you can proceed to other breakdowns and make accurate comparisons. then again some people like the data that already exists because it fits into their agenda perfectly. some people don't like to question things because they already have the answer that they want.
                  Yeah. I mean, it's fun but nothing to take overly seriously when we know how inaccurate it is.

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by Psylence83 View Post
                    Slippery motherfu@kers.....
                    Yeah, the list isn't too hard to understand but its so sloppily put together that these guys made it hard to understand. They included Floyd's Overall connect percentage (46%) but only his opponents power connect percentage (25%). I think Pacquiao's and Berto's overall percentage was an average of 19%

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Wilder's jab

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP