Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived

[DazBoxingFan]

As per usual computer rank ignores other users criticism, input and responses...

DazBoxingFan - this is a warning. You are trolling through this thread without substantial contributions or fact based questions. I will not accept that any longer.

Lol how am I trolling about? I and many other people have said about how the system is wrong and listed examples and you just bypass it

[computerrank]

How should anybody be able to see, how the system works? Where can anyone see, that all the ratings of a boxer is changed after his fights? You changed the system totally, but told nobody. But this means, that all fighters ratings drops after their last fight. That is what people actually SEE. You say, that in reality, they got a lot of points, but where can the users SEE it? Nowhere.

Look at Artur Beterbiev: https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/646981
How can the users see, that his last win actually gave him a lot of points, not cost him a lot of points? Please show me where. And show me where it says how many?

Take Callum Smith:
https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/631178

How can anybody see, that his points hasn't decreased the last two fights? How many points extra did he get after his 23rd fight after his 27th fight? Where does it show?

Lennox Lewis:
https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/1853
When Lennox Lewis got knocked out by Hasim Rahman, he was knocked out. Rahman was the better fighter. But not on Boxrec. After that fight Lewis should be ranked higher, because...? Because he won the rematch and other fights? NO, NO, NO! He lost to Rahman that night, and should be ranked low until the rematch. He wasn't "probably" better. He lost. That is not a guess, it is a result.

Look at Drake Thadzi:
https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/907

He beat James Toney, and after the fight, his ratings were extremely low compared to Toneys. NO! He beat Toney. Toney wasn't "probably" better. He LOST. End of story. It doesn't matter, which results he had later in his career. Toney lost. And the career of Thadzi didn't peak after his win against no hoper Darrell Flint. It did that after the Toney fight.


Nobody can understand the ratings now. The users used to get useful information. They could see, how a fighters points rose or fell after a fight. Now they get nothing. A lot of points are added, but nobody can see why or when.

I tell you, the ratings follow the estimated success line of the career. They ascend, around a top win and they ascend before the win. And they fall after that high, even without a definite loss.

You expect the ratings should follow every win and loss with a step up and step down. But the ratings follow a more general line as they intermediate between more than one bout. And the ratings will show the ascending or descending ratings estimation before a big win or before a big loss from a ex post perspective too. There is much more explanatory force regarding a career, when also looking at the fights after a bout. It would be stupid to ignore that.

What I will do. I will show the specific impact of every bout by attaching a second value. Showing a measure of points won or lost.

[Jens S]

Why don't you answer my questions?

[computerrank]

Why don't you answer my questions?

I answered them, but you don't accept the answers. You don't accept, that the ratings do not strictly follow every up and down in some example sequences of bouts. And explained that a perspective including the following bouts is valid and necessary from a career perspective. And I explained you, why.

And you asked, how a user could see the impact of a distinct bout. And I answered, I would provide an indicator per bout as an additional value shown.

[Jens S]

I'll make it easy for you:

1) How should anybody be able to see, how the system works?
2) Where can anyone see, that all the ratings of a boxer is changed after his fights?

You changed the system totally, but told nobody. But this means, that all fighters ratings drops after their last fight. That is what people actually SEE.

3) You say, that in reality, they got a lot of points, but where can the users SEE it?

Nowhere.

Look at Artur Beterbiev: https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/646981

4) How can the users see, that his last win actually gave him a lot of points, not cost him a lot of points? Please show me where.

5) And show me where it says how many?

Take Callum Smith:
https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/631178

6) How can anybody see, that his points hasn't decreased the last two fights?

7) How many points extra did he get after his 23rd fight after his 27th fight?

8) Where does it show?

Lennox Lewis:
https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/1853
When Lennox Lewis got knocked out by Hasim Rahman, he was knocked out. Rahman was the better fighter. But not on Boxrec. After that fight Lewis should be ranked higher, because...? Because he won the rematch and other fights? NO, NO, NO! He lost to Rahman that night, and should be ranked low until the rematch. He wasn't "probably" better. He lost. That is not a guess, it is a result.

Look at Drake Thadzi:
https://boxrec.com/en/proboxer/907

He beat James Toney, and after the fight, his ratings were extremely low compared to Toneys. NO! He beat Toney. Toney wasn't "probably" better. He LOST. End of story. It doesn't matter, which results he had later in his career. Toney lost. And the career of Thadzi didn't peak after his win against no hoper Darrell Flint. It did that after the Toney fight.

9) An extra question: how come Drake Thadzis career peak after a win against nobody, but deteriorate after the by far biggest win in his career?

10) Am I to understand it like this: Boxer A knockouts boxer B - KO1. Boxer A gets an injury that seriously diminish his boxing abilities. Fx a torn rotator cuff, gets in to a car accident or gets a drug addiction. He fights on despite being in poor shape. He loses to fighter C half a year after his win against boxer B. Does it affect his score after the win against boxer B?

11) Why?

[margaret thatcher]

So, did Beterbiev beating Gvo lower Gvo in the system's estimation, to the extent that it therefore lowered Bert from his rating he had after his previous fight? I'm curious because it's the last fight for both, and there is really no post-fight career to go on

Or is this something that doesn't really make sense to think about under the current method

[computerrank]

I'll make it easy for you:

1) How should anybody be able to see, how the system works?
2) Where can anyone see, that all the ratings of a boxer is changed after his fights?

...

My last try with you, but I fear, you don't read.

I said, you cannot see the fight impact NOW. But I will ADD a value to each bout, where will be able to see the influece of each bout to the rating.

[computerrank]

So, did Beterbiev beating Gvo lower Gvo in the system's estimation, to the extent that it therefore lowered Bert from his rating he had after his previous fight? I'm curious because it's the last fight for both, and there is really no post-fight career to go on

Or is this something that doesn't really make sense to think about under the current method

The biggest influence on Beterbiev's rating comes from his last bout.

And no it didn't go down caused by the bout. Beterbiev got a large push up - and the rating estimations for the bouts before got pushed up too. And the final rating estimation is a bit lower than the rating estimation for the bouts before, because there is always a rating discount at the last bout, because the rating may drop in future. The discount is, because there is no post-fight career.

[Lennox]

You must have changed the way you do the rankings 30 or so times, every time you claim perfection.

You have never managed in 30 tries to better these and you never will until you understand boxing.

www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200

[computerrank]

You must have changed the way you do the rankings 30 or so times, every time you claim perfection.

You have never managed in 30 tries to better these and you never will until you understand boxing.

www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200

I never claimed perfection, but trying to improve. You claim perfection - you are the Greatest, Lennox, we all know.

[Rocky-]

What is the logic behind a fighter winning a 4 star bout and in the following match against a higher ranked guy the system downgrades the event to 3 stars?!? In other words 4 VS 5 = 3

[JCS]

You must have changed the way you do the rankings 30 or so times, every time you claim perfection.

You have never managed in 30 tries to better these and you never will until you understand boxing.

www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200

I never claimed perfection, but trying to improve. You claim perfection - you are the Greatest, Lennox, we all know.

[computerrank]

What is the logic behind a fighter winning a 4 star bout and in the following match against a higher ranked guy the system downgrades the event to 3 stars?!? In other words 4 VS 5 = 3

Would please post the bout_ids and boxer ids?

[jujigatame]

Even though my last post was very critical, I think what CR has done here is getting misunderstood. It seems like he's basically tried to chart a curve of a boxer's "true" ability level throughout their career, accounting for all the data available throughout the entire database. It's an interesting thing to do, and seems like it would be exceptionally valuable for gambling/handicapping purposes. It's just not the way most boxing fans think of boxing rankings, and not the way they want their rankings to work. These rankings are attempting to be predictive and forward-looking, whereas most boxing rankings are backward-looking, reacting only to a boxer's specific accomplishments as they happen.

I think it's an interesting alternative system, I just wish it didn't replace the old one. FightMatrix.com for example maintains multiple different ranking algorithms that users can switch between. That's a really nice feature.

[computerrank]

Even though my last post was very critical, I think what CR has done here is getting misunderstood. It seems like he's basically tried to chart a curve of a boxer's "true" ability level throughout their career, accounting for all the data available throughout the entire database. It's an interesting thing to do, and seems like it would be exceptionally valuable for gambling/handicapping purposes. It's just not the way most boxing fans think of boxing rankings, and not the way they want their rankings to work. These rankings are attempting to be predictive and forward-looking, whereas most boxing rankings are backward-looking, reacting only to a boxer's specific accomplishments as they happen.

I think it's an interesting alternative system, I just wish it didn't replace the old one. FightMatrix.com for example maintains multiple different ranking algorithms that users can switch between. That's a really nice feature.

Boxrec will be back with parallel rating options too. I already said that. But it needs time.

There are some priority non-rating features do be implemented first.

I am working on a solution, to show the ratings impact of a bout directly in the current version.

[marcianofan]

Boxrec will be back with parallel rating options too. I already said that. But it needs time.

There are some priority non-rating features do be implemented first.

I am working on a solution, to show the ratings impact of a bout directly in the current version.

I know in the past you said there's no specific timeframe for this, and I know you'd probably be hesitant to announce one even if you do have an idea because of the pressure of knowing everyone will throw a fit 2 days before it's due on account of it's not early...but is there even a worst-case/best-case sort of ballpark estimate you might be able to float for how much time the parallel ratings might take to implement? We're an impatient lot, I know, but having a concrete time period that we know 100% not to expect an update by might help that impatience somewhat.

I'll say this- I do have more respect for what you're trying to do with the new rankings than I did at rollout, but like many others I still prefer the old ones for my own purposes, and will be thrilled when they are at least available for viewing again.

[pugilisticspecialist]

Even though my last post was very critical, I think what CR has done here is getting misunderstood. It seems like he's basically tried to chart a curve of a boxer's "true" ability level throughout their career, accounting for all the data available throughout the entire database. It's an interesting thing to do, and seems like it would be exceptionally valuable for gambling/handicapping purposes. It's just not the way most boxing fans think of boxing rankings, and not the way they want their rankings to work. These rankings are attempting to be predictive and forward-looking, whereas most boxing rankings are backward-looking, reacting only to a boxer's specific accomplishments as they happen.

I think it's an interesting alternative system, I just wish it didn't replace the old one. FightMatrix.com for example maintains multiple different ranking algorithms that users can switch between. That's a really nice feature.

Boxrec will be back with parallel rating options too. I already said that. But it needs time.

There are some priority non-rating features do be implemented first.

I am working on a solution, to show the ratings impact of a bout directly in the current version.

The new system is the best it's ever been. Especially the all-time rankings.
I wouldn't bother with parallel rating options, it just overcomplicates things. Just use the system that best predicts results.
If you have multiple rating options, you're just going to get tons of bettors coming to the forum asking which system is best for predicting results.
You don't need a solution to show the ratings impact of a bout directly either. We already pretty much know the impact of a bout by the result and how many points the opponent has.
The old system was stupid because it basically implied that Andy Ruiz was the ~15th best heavyweight in the world at the opening bell of his first fight with Joshua, but 7 rounds later he'd magically developed into the best heayweight in the world. The new system is closer to reality.

[pugilisticspecialist]

FightMatrix.com also needs to figure out the best system for predicting bouts and get rid of the other systems.
They currently have FOUR options and basically make end-users like me guess which one is the best. That's THEIR job to figure out, not mine.

[JCS]

FightMatrix.com also needs to figure out the best system for predicting bouts and get rid of the other systems
They currently have FOUR options and basically make end-users like me guess which one is the best. That's THEIR job to figure out, not mine.

Read the FAQ for more info.. Prediction rate isn't a primary goal for the main system. The alternate options are just to give folks something to look at and pick whichever one they like as there are slight differences.. All the systems have comparable prediction rate. MMA is too variable for a "magic bullet" in terms of overall prediction rate.

Going to be rolling out some additional functionality soon that show fighters in the standard system who vary wildly from the pure mathematical counterparts.

[Rocky-]

What is the logic behind a fighter winning a 4 star bout and in the following match against a higher ranked guy the system downgrades the event to 3 stars?!? In other words 4 VS 5 = 3

Would please post the bout_ids and boxer ids?

A couple of examples…

Boxer ID# 176707 won a 4 star bout Fight:1969536 against boxer ID# 477723 then fought boxer ID# 457231 in Fight:2004275

Boxer ID# 488033 won a 4 star bout Fight:1981524 against boxer ID# 014452 then fought boxer ID# 356831 in Fight:2037019

There should be a rule implemented that ensures the winner of a 4 star fight doesn't drop-off to 3 stars in his very next bout against higher ranked opposition

[jujigatame]

FightMatrix.com also needs to figure out the best system for predicting bouts and get rid of the other systems
They currently have FOUR options and basically make end-users like me guess which one is the best. That's THEIR job to figure out, not mine.

I don't think most users of either BoxRec or FightMatrix particularly value prediction rate as a criteria for their rankings. Maybe some gamblers do but that's probably a relatively small percentage of the user base.

[DazBoxingFan]

FightMatrix.com also needs to figure out the best system for predicting bouts and get rid of the other systems
They currently have FOUR options and basically make end-users like me guess which one is the best. That's THEIR job to figure out, not mine.

I don't think most users of either BoxRec or FightMatrix particularly value prediction rate as a criteria for their rankings. Maybe some gamblers do but that's probably a relatively small percentage of the user base.

Exactly. This model may be good for a gambling website but not a boxing one. As previously mentioned I too appreciate CR always looking to improve but it’s never good how he bypasses any criticism of any kind and doesn’t ask for users opinion before changing things - just as he feels

[computerrank]

Would please post the bout_ids and boxer ids?

A couple of examples…

Boxer ID# 176707 won a 4 star bout Fight:1969536 against boxer ID# 477723 then fought boxer ID# 457231 in Fight:2004275

Boxer ID# 488033 won a 4 star bout Fight:1981524 against boxer ID# 014452 then fought boxer ID# 356831 in Fight:2037019

There should be a rule implemented that ensures the winner of a 4 star fight doesn't drop-off to 3 stars in his very next bout against higher ranked opposition

Ok, I now understand.
Both boxers were in decline at end of their career in this time period. So, when these boxers match their next bout, the ratings are down retrospectively, as the ratings know the following results.

[Rocky-]

Ok, I now understand.
Both boxers were in decline at end of their career in this time period. So, when these boxers match their next bout, the ratings are down retrospectively, as the ratings know the following results.

I don't dislike that the system takes future achievements into consideration but surely an undefeated fighter who just earned his career best scalp is not "in decline" by the time of his next bout? James Kirkland completely ruined Glen Tapia yet their fight is still rated 4 stars, so there are exceptions to the current rule.

[JCS]

I actually like the new system BUT only for getting a picture of the past and analyzing career trends. It makes it much easier to see the quality of a boxer at a given point in time.

However, must agree with the majority on trying to analyze the effects of fight movement and for the state of the current rankings.

If only we could somehow combine the two... Use the old system for the current rankings, bake the new system into some kind of visualization piece for the profile pages.... as for the fight-by-fight changes, not sure there's an easy answer for that. MAYBE scrap the rating changes and show ranking changes based on the old system... I like that idea.

Current Rankings = Old System
Career Trend Visualization/Analysis = New System
Per-Fight Profile Changes = Old System, but Show Rank not Rating