That is one of the accepted pronunciations, yeah:
/ˈôfəl,ˈäfəl/
It's the second of those two, and as it happens it's the default pronunciation that Google uses here in the US.
That's now 2 people objecting to one of the most useful linguistic tools in existence based on, as Xuc Xac explained, not understanding what it is for or how it works.
It's basically like walking up to a microscope, looking through the lens, and calling it worthless because you can't see anything. (Meanwhile you didn't add a slide and didn't turn on the light.)
---
On the IPA and weird mouth sounds:
Burps are not in the IPA. They aren't a speech sound. They aren't used to make words as part of legitimate communication. (Schoolyard antics aside, there is no language that requires speakers to be able to burp on command.)
The IPA is used to identify Phonemes. The building blocks that make up words. If you want to make a language consisting of strange sounds, be my guest.
I spent time amongst a group called the Nivakle while I was in Paraguay, and the Nivakle word for "yes" is just a sharp, audible inhale. It took me a while to normalize to myself that people weren't surprised, they just agreed with me. But that sound, if I recall correctly, is in the IPA, even though it is a rare sound, linguistically.
And the sputtering lips sound I am 100% certain is in the IPA due to a conlang video that discussed that sound and had its IPA symbol included.
In short:
Jeezum jones, there's a lot of armchair linguists trying to disprove or dismiss a major portion of linguistic science for... no apparent reason.