Isn't it about time "boxer cam" was introduced?

delad

Boxers should be made to wear miniscule cameras on the top of their shorts, and possibly also on the gloves at the wrist part. It would provide some great shots, particularly when someone is knocked out. Referres should also be made to wear cameras on their shirt collars for example. Thoughts?

Bobby Baccala

The camera would add unnecesary weight to the arms and shorts, a large price to pay for our entertainment. Shít idea if you ask me.

delad

P4DDY2K11 wrote: »

The camera would add unnecesary weight to the arms and shorts, a large price to pay for our entertainment. Shít idea if you ask me.

the cams weigh virtually nothing

cowzerp

delad wrote: »

the cams weigh virtually nothing

Still a pointless idea, plus they'd probably get broke easily anyway.

delad

cowzerp wrote: »

Still a pointless idea, plus they'd probably get broke easily anyway.

No its not, its a great idea. They are so small and made of a material that is hard to break them even if you tried. They would also be securely fastened onto the glove that there would be only a small chance of them becoming broken. The boxers would have them on each glove and would also wear them on their belt and possibly even have one on their shoelaces pointing up at the action. So the chance of all cameras being broken is about a million to one.

Anything that greatly enhances the viewers experience of the fight should be welcomed, and this would be add a great new dimension and insight to the viewers at home.

Dusty87

on the gloves? Great shots on a knock out? On the underside we'd see the chest/belly. On the topside of the wrist we'd see the crowd above the head, at most a bit of their hair. No, dosn do it for me sorry.

delad

Dusty87 wrote: »

on the gloves? Great shots on a knock out? On the underside we'd see the chest/belly. On the topside of the wrist we'd see the crowd above the head, at most a bit of their hair. No, dosn do it for me sorry.

What about the cam on their belt or the cam on their laces looking up, does that do it for you? It would be great to get close up action like that. And the referee with a cam on his shirt collar would be a great viewpoint also. People hate change and will resist it at every stage, until they actually see the end product, get used to it for a week and then admit that yeah that new viewpoint is fantastic.

Dusty87

dude, seriously, its a no go. Feet are always moving, and fast. Its goin to be hard. Belt, same thing, always moving, most action happens in close. It wont pick it up. I can see what your saying, but it wont work.

cowzerp

delad wrote: »

No its not, its a great idea.

Why because it's yours, it's not new and has been used in pride fc, and it is stupid-utterly useless to the fans-with technology we can view ko's from any angle now anyway.

delad

Dusty87 wrote: »

dude, seriously, its a no go. Feet are always moving, and fast. Its goin to be hard. Belt, same thing, always moving, most action happens in close. It wont pick it up. I can see what your saying, but it wont work.

No your wrong, I won't let it go because its a good idea. Who cares if feet/waist are always moving, I'm not talking about having the whole fight on these cams I'm talking about a few seconds here and there in each round to supplement the normal camera.

The ref cam would probably be used more than the waist/boot cam, but all will have their part to play.

delad

cowzerp wrote: »

Why because it's yours, it's not new and has been used in pride fc, and it is stupid-utterly useless to the fans-with technology we can view ko's from any angle now anyway.

Not from the boxers angle we can't. I wanna see the knockout blow from the person who threw the punch, I then want to view the cam on the boxer as they fall to the floor, then stagger around trying to get up in time for the count while the ref looks them in the face and asks if they are ok to continue. You can't get that with normal cams.

Having cams on the ref would be great too.

Now keep pressing F5 on your keyboard in case someone else disagrees with me so you can then go and thank their post. Good lad.

Dusty87

im not wrong. You've watched too many films where the boxer punches at the camera. It will not work!

Dusty87

you've a bit of a goo on ya for these 'player cams', whats the story, new invention of yours?

delad

I just don't like these "computer says no" types, the type of people who break out in a rash at the thought of change or progress. People who only see problems (or at least think they see problems) but never see solutions, instead dismissing any new idea without giving it any critical thought. The world is full of these types and it p1sses me off.

I know having a ref cam would be a great addition to the static cameras at the side of the ring, unfortunately it could be 10 years before some tv exec has the same idea, and even then it will probably be poo-pooed by his colleagues for a further 5 on top of that before they give it a go.

Bobby Baccala

This sounds like some dragons den shít.

Opinicus

How would you prevent the cameras on the wrist (presumably made from plastic) cutting fighters faces?

Big Ears

I think judge cams would be much more appreciated by hardcore fans, get to look at the fight from a judges point of view and see how they come up with such ludicrous scoring so often !

honestly though I think having cameras on a boxer are a terrible idea for all the reasons mentioned already, maybe having one on the referees collar would have some merit, but I doubt the referees would be too happy about it knowing it would be used as much to scrutinise every decision they make as much as improving the view for the viewing audience.

I think the OP is expecting these cameras on shorts/gloves to produce views similar to what you see in EA's Fight Night after you've knocked and opponent out. In reality it would be nothing like that, with cameras on gloves providing a terrible view (most of what is shown would just be part of the glove and the rest would be crown of the head etc), and unless you could make the camera on the belt rotate it's view or move up and down as the fight progresses most of what it captures while action is actual occuring would be both fighters arms blocking out a decent view of anything else.

Of course having a camera that actually could rotate or move on a fighters shorts as a fight goes on couldn't be all of cheap/exceptionally lightweight and unobtrusive/easy for technicians to operate/productive at producing a good camera angle.

delad wrote: »

I wanna see the knockout blow from the person who threw the punch, I then want to view the cam on the boxer as they fall to the floor, then stagger around trying to get up in time for the count while the ref looks them in the face and asks if they are ok to continue. You can't get that with normal cams.

This makes you seem somewhat sadistic.


It's nice to try and think a little outside the box OP, of course how are you meant to bare fruit without thinking a little differently. But you're idea simply wouldn't work in practicality as nice an idea as it actually is.

Underground

You made a similar thread on the soccer forum which begs the question: Do you work for Sky/ESPN/some other network? Otherwise it's a slightly strange interest you have there.

Dusty87

Underground wrote: »

You made a similar thread on the soccer forum which begs the question: Do you work for Sky/ESPN/some other network? Otherwise it's a slightly strange interest you have there.

Id say he thinks it will make him millions if it catches on and just wont take everyones word that it wont work. But then again, we all must be one of these 'computer says no types':rolleyes:

delad

Opinicus wrote: »

How would you prevent the cameras on the wrist (presumably made from plastic) cutting fighters faces?

They are miniscule, they are barely noticeable and weigh virtually nothing, it would be impossible to do any damage with them. Some people don't seem to realise just how small these cameras are.

delad

Dusty87 wrote: »

Id say he thinks it will make him millions if it catches on and just wont take everyones word that it wont work. But then again, we all must be one of these 'computer says no types':rolleyes:

oh yeah I'm waiting for the money to start flooding in because I suggested an idea on some internet forum

Dusty87

delad wrote: »

oh yeah I'm waiting for the money to start flooding in because I suggested an idea on some internet forum

You suggested an idea, got the wrong opinions you wanted, and now people who regularly post on this forum are 'computer says no' types who 'break out in a rash' at the thought of change. Come off it will ya. It wont ****ing work. Maybe the ref cam, but all it can offer is not much more than the other camera's. I take it you've very little interest in boxing. Miniscule? So is stitching and we see what that can do. Take it on the chin (excuse the pun), but you've got your answer. If you that dead set against all our opinions and we're wrong, go patent it. Get all your camera's. Sure if your that sure and wont listen, you've nothin to loose, but everything to gain.

delad

Dusty87 wrote: »

You suggested an idea, got the wrong opinions you wanted, and now people who regularly post on this forum are 'computer says no' types who 'break out in a rash' at the thought of change. Come off it will ya. It wont ****ing work. Maybe the ref cam, but all it can offer is not much more than the other camera's. I take it you've very little interest in boxing. Miniscule? So is stitching and we see what that can do. Take it on the chin (excuse the pun), but you've got your answer. If you that dead set against all our opinions and we're wrong, go patent it. Get all your camera's. Sure if your that sure and wont listen, you've nothin to loose, but everything to gain.

The ref cam is up close and personal, and is not static unlike the other cameras around the ring, it would offer a nice new perspective.

I've no interest in making money, I just want a better viewer experience for the sports I love. We've seen how much driver and car cams have enhanced f1, I just want the same to follow through to boxing.

Whatever you say about the stitching, there is nothing you can say about cams on boxers waists and laces.

Dusty87

ahhhh, well played sir. At first i thought you were just ignorant of the sport and stupid. But with comments above i now realise your a troll. Nice try.

delad

Playing the old "If you can't beat 'em, call them a troll" card are we? I thought you were better than that.

Dusty87

delad wrote: »

Playing the old "If you can't beat 'em, call them a troll" card are we? I thought you were better than that.

Troll reply but nope Im still here. Iv already explained why you idea wont work. Now what else would you like to debate? Would you like to say how it will work, instead of just stating everyones wrong? Or have you not thought that far ahead?

delad

Dusty87 wrote: »

Troll reply but nope Im still here. Iv already explained why you idea wont work. Now what else would you like to debate? Would you like to say how it will work, instead of just stating everyones wrong? Or have you not thought that far ahead?

Stop back seat modding with your troll comments. You haven't explained why my ideas wont work, you explained why you think they may not work, based on your incorrect assumptions.

I on the other hand, have explained why it will work, and given examples why.

I should also remind you that you have already conceded that ref cams may work.

Dusty87

em, i have explained why it wont work. Read page one. Yes i said the ref cam MAY work, but what did i say afterwards.
Now, could you disprove what i and others said, and explain how they will work, instead of childish 'cos it will', please.

cowzerp

Ref cams have been used in Mma for years and there rubbish.

Cameras are not static, they move about and can zoom in and out.

The idea of cameras on gloves makes no sense and would cause cuts etc, on the waist would get broke and be a poor view, boxing is not a computer game.

colly10

delad wrote: »

They are miniscule, they are barely noticeable and weigh virtually nothing, it would be impossible to do any damage with them. Some people don't seem to realise just how small these cameras are.

Do they not tape the laces because the laces in the gloves damage the other fighter? The tape comes off fairly regularly too and you'd expect tape to hold to a wrist part of a glove pretty well, it rubs so much during a fight that it doesn't always hold though.
Shots from the gloves would be so fast that it would be hard to get anything of any real quality not even taking into account the change of rotation and angle in that fraction of a second. It also wouldn't pinpoint the part that landed as that would be the front of the glove. The glove itself would also obscure your view.

The glove idea would be better than the shorts or laces, I'm not going to bother going to bother going into why but I'm sure you've worked it out yourself

JoesephStalin

Kenny Bayless was wearing one of the cameras at the Amir Khan fight the other night..."delad" must have been on to sky :-)