Striking stats in ufc broadcasts

[jko1355]

Hello gentlemen,

I'm just curious if others of you question the stats shown during the fights.

To be honest I don't count while I watch but I watched the Caceres vs Woodson fight and watched three very closely contested rounds.

The commentators were on Woodsons nuts the whole fight but I watched it and it was close ... then the stats come up in round 2 and they said Woodson had something like 60 strikes to 20...

I'm willing to be wrong but that isn't at all what I saw...

Am I just wrong or are these stats ridiculous ?

 

[RockyLockridge]

Sometimes I feel like the stats are bullshit

 

[Buckland]

There are three types of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

 

[Espresso]

Casual detected.
Watch fights with a strike counter on each hand like a real fan

 

[StonedLemur]

Hello gentlemen,

I'm just curious if others of you question the stats shown during the fights.

To be honest I don't count while I watch but I watched the Caceres vs Woodson fight and watched three very closely contested rounds.

The commentators were on Woodsons nuts the whole fight but I watched it and it was close ... then the stats come up in round 2 and they said Woodson had something like 60 strikes to 20...

I'm willing to be wrong but that isn't at all what I saw...

Am I just wrong or are these stats ridiculous ?

You're definitely right on this sir.
I swear they just guess sometimes lol

 

[Tweak896]

I will be honest and some fights are too chaotic to keep mental track of who landed what. I feel like majority of people here are making shit up in some fights thinking they know the count at the end of the round. The Caceres/Woodson fight had tons of even exchanges, but lots of the strikes Caceres threw seemed to hit shoulders or miss the target, where Woodson looked to hit the mark more often. I trust strike stats typically more than my own brain's memory most of the time, but sometimes the stats make me feel like I forgot parts of the fight.

 

[Myrddin Wild]

They're called "un-official" for the very reason that they're flawed & everyone knows it. You could never have a real time "significant strike" counter of any accuracy.

They're done by a guy sitting cage side with clickers. When he sees a strike of any kind for one guy, he clicks that guys strike clicker. same with the other.

I've gone back & re-watched MANY fight rounds that were close & controversial, using slow motion, rewind, etc... too be as 100% as I can be... (some angles don't show it well enough to be 100%) and the "fight metric" numbers are "NEVER" accurate, and almost always aren't even close.

When I do that, I would also use a rating system of "hard, med & light" strike... (which the fight metrics don't distinguish...) & that even further spreads the gap on what you & I would consider a "significant strike" compared to what the clicker guyz are tallying.

It's ridiculous for anyone to make a case in any debate using those numbers. They're for entertainment purposes only & basically just give the commentators something to talk about. Don't ever use them for trying to figure out who you think won a round.

 

[Sasha]

You just have to know the unspoken rounds

If the guy on the receiving end says "ow that hurt ! Ah damn why have I not become a cook like my late father wanted ?" Then the hit counts double.
If he says "ouch" it's tripled.

They're outdated IMO.

 

[Jackonfire]

Never trust the commentary. At UFC 300 when Andrade beat Rodriguez, both DC and Rogan were going on and on about Rodriguez's striking, making it sound like she was beating Andrade to a pulp. It got so bad at one point, Anik needed to jump in and literally said "It should be pointed out that Marina is only landing around 30% of her strikes while Jessica is landing at over 50% of hers"

 

[LiQuiD42]

This is how I do it TS. One in each hand.