i would like to see exactly how that shit is done because i don't believe they are accurate at all.

they have buttons. one for each connected punch and one for each thrown punch. not accurate at all.

yeah...that bullshit coupled with the biased commentary can really do a number on less educated fans. i got 3 texts during the fight asking...."is it just me...or are these numbers off?" thought it was worth a thread in here.

How would you have had the numbers? Who was the commentary biased for, Floyd?

It's just a guy ringside pressing a button

I agree. The guy ringside, likely isn't listenin' to Grumpy Old Men or the Gone Fishin' commentators. He/She is just pressin' a button.

that's my question...is it just one guy?

the numbers seemed inflated for floyd and low for cotto. it also seemed like there had to be blood for cotto to get any credit. at one point they had him landing 3 punches when i knew he landed much more. yes...the commentary was very biased for floyd. i get it though....the pac/may fight is a big money fight so they have to convince the public just in case it was too close. they should just let the chips fall where they may. floyd won that fight. there was no need for the felatio during the match.

he/she may not be listening to the grumpy old men....but like them...he/she is either grossly incompetent or purposefully misleading. either way...it's fucked up.

I thought that Floyd won the fight convincingly but Cotto did fight a rough tough solid fight..props to him but his only effective punch was his jab. I'm not really sure if there was biased towards Floyd that i noticed because he was clearly winning the fight. Cotto did win a few rounds but most of those crowd wowing flurries he threw were blocked. It looks good but nothing was really landing other than the jab...reminded me of when Floyd fought De La Hoya. Overall good fight.

its two guys. one for each fighter. at least for regular undercard fights that is.

Not sure.

I agree, at some points it did look like Cotto was landing more than compubox was saying. But you can't 100% rely on/trust compubox, because ringside viewers don't get a complete 360 20/20 on the fight like Television viewers do. Plus someone could land 60 punches to someone else 20 punches in a round, then next round could only land 20 to 40, and hes up 20 on compubox because of the previous round. This what people tried to do to justify Pacquiao's victory for Marquez in their third fight, but if you go off compubox, Marquez definitely won the first two fights. You can't rely on compubox, you have to use your own instinct on scoring the fight, and Floyd clearly won this fight, that's the broader view on that, anyone who thinks Cotto won is either delusional, dumb, or trolling.

Not disputing the decision. I had Floyd winning 8-4 maybe 7-5 at worst. It was a good fight and I do know how to score rounds. I just think their numbers are off.

I thought the landed punches were actually high for Cotto. I thought that 1st round that Lederman gave Cotto was a joke. I thought Floyd schooled him and the punches Cotto threw in the corner were missing the mark. That being said, it was a very close fight and just because a punch doesn't score, doesn't mean it doesn't do damage. I think they should do Compubox before AND after fights using the footage.

i totally agree. cotto was beating arms and shoulders and that created the open shots he did land. i guess the point i was trying to make with this thread is that there are geeks ringside pressing buttons that don't have a clue about what it is they are watching.