you yourself claim they arent perfect or close too and thats the problem, they are being used or abused and thrown out there as the truth by rogan and goldberg.
thats just "strikes". The next one is something a complete wack-job couldnt even have invented and thats significant strikes. Whats significant and how is that measured.?
the stats dont tell anything about a fight really, as they are flawed.
My point is that the stats aren't SO far off as to misconstrue the point of quoting the statistic. For example, who cares if someone is outpunched by 50-10 or by 45-15? The point is that one person is clearly outpunching the other. And like I said before they post up the official numbers on their website shortly after the fights which are almost 100% accurate. If you disagree then find a fight and watch it in slow motion and count landed/missed strikes yourself and you will see how wrong you are.
I already defined "significant" for you, it's basically any strike besides pitter patter punches on the ground or in the clinch that have no momentum behind them. It's not that complicated, I don't know why people are so confused.