Posted:
#1
Records tell a tale, but the film shows the truth.
I know people are high on undefeated, KO percentage, how many championship belts, divisions, etc...
the Bottom lines is performance (against what type of competition).
1) Did they do just enough to win by choice?
2) Did they do just enough to win giving it their all?
3) Did they appear lack luster?
4) Did they dominate unexpectedly?
5) Did they dominate as expected?
6) Have they been consistent?
7) How active have they been?
8) Even though they may have fought a HOF fighter, was that fighter in prime, before his prime (not-mature), just past prime, in a major decline?
9) Is a fighter fighting top opposition for survival and paydays?
10) Did a style match-up cause a fighter who was expected to be dominate cause that fighter major trouble.
11) Some fighters (Calzaghe, etc) besides being excellent, for having excellent skills, often have an awkward style that makes for a difficult fight and also causes a great fighter to look bad. This is the marque and why they say styles make fights. Some fighters aren't very good, but seem to give many fighters problems.
XX) etc,etc.. these are the constant questions to ask and many more.
Boxing is probably 90% subjective and 10% objective.
A brief definition for the newbie.
I know people are high on undefeated, KO percentage, how many championship belts, divisions, etc...
the Bottom lines is performance (against what type of competition).
1) Did they do just enough to win by choice?
2) Did they do just enough to win giving it their all?
3) Did they appear lack luster?
4) Did they dominate unexpectedly?
5) Did they dominate as expected?
6) Have they been consistent?
7) How active have they been?
8) Even though they may have fought a HOF fighter, was that fighter in prime, before his prime (not-mature), just past prime, in a major decline?
9) Is a fighter fighting top opposition for survival and paydays?
10) Did a style match-up cause a fighter who was expected to be dominate cause that fighter major trouble.
11) Some fighters (Calzaghe, etc) besides being excellent, for having excellent skills, often have an awkward style that makes for a difficult fight and also causes a great fighter to look bad. This is the marque and why they say styles make fights. Some fighters aren't very good, but seem to give many fighters problems.
XX) etc,etc.. these are the constant questions to ask and many more.
Boxing is probably 90% subjective and 10% objective.
A brief definition for the newbie.
HANDICAPPING
THE OBJECTIVE APPROACH
This is what is often referred to as a numbers game, or basically the statistical approach. Statistics should be fundamental to all sports handicapping; however, they should not necessarily be used in isolation or in lieu of all other methods.
THE SUBJECTIVE APPROACH
The subjective is highly personal, and is constantly subject to the handicapper’s psychological and mental attitude, whimsy, and emotions. Subjective approach uses many intangibles that aren’t shown on the stat sheet.
0
Hot Forum Topics
