Men's Amateur Rankings Released by Michael Smith

[DCAmateurBoxing]

Michael Smith (UK) has released his independent men's rankings and I've posted them on my blog. He let me know that feedback is welcomed. I think that he does a great job compiling all of this information and I appreciate all of his hard work. The first rankings include Junior, Youth and Senior rankings. These are scheduled to be done monthly, with the female rankings to be completed in January.

World Amateur Rankings http://dcboxing.blogspot.com/2008/11/ab ... eased.html
American Senior Rankings http://dcboxing.blogspot.com/2008/11/qu ... kings.html
Great Britain and Ireland Senior Rankings http://dcboxing.blogspot.com/2008/12/qu ... eland.html
European Senior Rankings http://dcboxing.blogspot.com/2008/12/qu ... ateur.html
Cuban Senior Rankings http://dcboxing.blogspot.com/2008/11/qu ... kings.html
Russian Senior Rankings http://dcboxing.blogspot.com/2008/11/qu ... ateur.html

[boxmel]

American Senior Rankings http://dcboxing.blogspot.com/2008/11/qu ... kings.html

Considering USAB publishes national amateur rankinks - Michael must have a lot of time on his hands.

[Kolya]

Two questions: Does this guy know that Cam O'Connell is Canadian? And does he know that Duran Caferro routinely beats him in match bouts?

[DCAmateurBoxing]

Two questions: Does this guy know that Cam O'Connell is Canadian? And does he know that Duran Caferro routinely beats him in match bouts?

This is why I posted, so he could get feedback

[DCAmateurBoxing]

Two questions: Does this guy know that Cam O'Connell is Canadian? And does he know that Duran Caferro routinely beats him in match bouts?

Nope. But he does now. I'm sure there will be plenty of edits to this, but you all are getting it first . . .

[DCAmateurBoxing]

That was nice of him to include females.

Female Rankings will be out in January, Amy.

[adaboxer150]

hey dc amatuer boxing.
nick kisner told me about the dcblogspot rankings and i looked and some of the fighters in my weight class shouldnt be ahead of me in the 112 weight class?like timothy ibarra?
he hasnt made it to at least one national tournament this year and hes ranked 3?

[boxmel]

Sigh. The problem with doing independent rankings is that you can't please everyone. Any idea what his criteria is?

[DCAmateurBoxing]

hey dc amatuer boxing.
nick kisner told me about the dcblogspot rankings and i looked and some of the fighters in my weight class shouldnt be ahead of me in the 112 weight class?like timothy ibarra?
he hasnt made it to at least one national tournament this year and hes ranked 3?

Per Michael Smith: Timothy Ibarra is there based on his old form and the fact he beat Juan Leija and only lost on countback to Padilla in the 2007 National PAL.He also won the 2007 Ringside tournament. He has been inactive and will be deleted from my lists for that reason in a month or so if he does not fight.

[DCAmateurBoxing]

Sigh. The problem with doing independent rankings is that you can't please everyone. Any idea what his criteria is?

Michael Smith has records of all bouts in the last three years, which are listed on the excellent Amateur Boxing Stefa Website, from all national sites including Russia, Cuba and Britain and many many others. From there, he compares and evaluates boxers. It does take time, but he says he has an analytical mind and loves doing it. Obviously, there are results he misses such as club shows, but he does his best. If you know any sites other then USAB, Mel's site and Ringside let him know. Darren at ABA boxing and Usaboxing use/used a points system but Michael doesn't.

Yes, independent rankings are different than those using a pts system, but I enjoy looking at his research. I always make sure that I'm clear when I mention his rankings that they are independent. I like the fact that boxers get credit for who they beat also. Again, I can't imagine how much work is involved with this, so I appreciate the time. Also, he plans on updating this monthly. The next due in early January.

[adaboxer150]

thank you!
i dont think he will be at nationals any time soon.he keeps getting beat by the kid in new mexico mike herrea.im not positive on that ive just heard it through the grapevine.

[Dennis]

I'm a little surprised by his rankings for the U.S. in the 201# class. He has Nick Kisner at #1. Paul Koon defeated Nick this year at the regionals. Paul also defeated Jeremiah Graziano at the NGG after Jeremiah had defeated Nick. So I'm not sure how you rank Nick ahead of Paul. I know that Nick won the PAL, but there were only 3 boxers entered in the 201 pound class. The other two guys Lenroy Thompson and Walter Burns had boxed in the 201+ pound class earlier in the year.

[boxmel]

And I don't think he should include Ringside in his rankings unless he also includes other national invitationals such as the Ohio State Fair - and there are others.

[Unit]

yeh that oconnel kid isnt too great gave em 3 8 counts in 07 ringsides with only 11 fights
its nice too see mah brother Tramaine williams number 5 in jo world rankings

[Sportssummary]

Not to be stupid but I'm not aware of who Michael Smith is? Can anyone enlighten me?

[a87star]

Just wanted to comment that Maxim Dvinskiy has fought at 51kg during tournaments this year and fought at 48kg as a junior (2007)

[DCAmateurBoxing]

I'm a little surprised by his rankings for the U.S. in the 201# class. He has Nick Kisner at #1. Paul Koon defeated Nick this year at the regionals. Paul also defeated Jeremiah Graziano at the NGG after Jeremiah had defeated Nick. So I'm not sure how you rank Nick ahead of Paul. I know that Nick won the PAL, but there were only 3 boxers entered in the 201 pound class. The other two guys Lenroy Thompson and Walter Burns had boxed in the 201+ pound class earlier in the year.

Per Michael Smith regarding your question Dennis:
"Koon is ranked below Kisner because he has lost to Craig Lewis and Michael Bissett in the last year whereas Nick has beaten Bissett and Rahman. The Ohio state fair only lists winners, if Mel knows the full results or any others I would love to know them."

[DCAmateurBoxing]

Not to be stupid but I'm not aware of who Michael Smith is? Can anyone enlighten me?

He's out of the UK and apparently has a computer for a brain because he compiles the rankings from a bunch of different sources, taking into a count not just where you win, but against who. Not to mention he will be updating the rankings monthly. He said that he welcomes all input as he uses the most up to date info that he has access to (see my earlier post with some of the sources). If you do have any questions, just post them. From what I know, he's the only 'entity' attempting to do this on an international scale.

[Dennis]

I'm a little surprised by his rankings for the U.S. in the 201# class. He has Nick Kisner at #1. Paul Koon defeated Nick this year at the regionals. Paul also defeated Jeremiah Graziano at the NGG after Jeremiah had defeated Nick. So I'm not sure how you rank Nick ahead of Paul. I know that Nick won the PAL, but there were only 3 boxers entered in the 201 pound class. The other two guys Lenroy Thompson and Walter Burns had boxed in the 201+ pound class earlier in the year.

Per Michael Smith regarding your question Dennis:
"Koon is ranked below Kisner because he has lost to Craig Lewis and Michael Bissett in the last year whereas Nick has beaten Bissett and Rahman. The Ohio state fair only lists winners, if Mel knows the full results or any others I would love to know them."

I would say head-to-head results are a better predictor. Defeating Rahman isn't that impressive. It is Michael's opinion and since he is doing all the work, it is his perogative.

[DCAmateurBoxing]

I'm a little surprised by his rankings for the U.S. in the 201# class. He has Nick Kisner at #1. Paul Koon defeated Nick this year at the regionals. Paul also defeated Jeremiah Graziano at the NGG after Jeremiah had defeated Nick. So I'm not sure how you rank Nick ahead of Paul. I know that Nick won the PAL, but there were only 3 boxers entered in the 201 pound class. The other two guys Lenroy Thompson and Walter Burns had boxed in the 201+ pound class earlier in the year.

Per Michael Smith regarding your question Dennis:
"Koon is ranked below Kisner because he has lost to Craig Lewis and Michael Bissett in the last year whereas Nick has beaten Bissett and Rahman. The Ohio state fair only lists winners, if Mel knows the full results or any others I would love to know them."

I would say head-to-head results are a better predictor. Defeating Rahman isn't that impressive. It is Michael's opinion and since he is doing all the work, it is his perogative.

Dennis, I agree with you about Rahman, but would you say there is something to looking getting "credit" for who you defeat though? I just think sometimes victories should be weighted depending on who your opponent is and that current rankings don't address that. If a boxer beats nationally ranked boxers but for whatever reason (sometimes financial) doesn't face those boxers at a major tournament - should that wining boxer be ranked? Just a thought and my two cents. The thing that I like about Michael's rankings is that he seems to have thought out in depth every single ranking in lists. No systems perfect and I know we all won't be happy no matter what is used. . .

[Dennis]

I do think you should give credit to boxers who win and not just those who enter the most tournaments. There are boxers who only go to one tournament a year and do very well, but don't get ranked very high in the USA Boxing rankings because there are many boxers who compete in all 3 ranking tournaments and are selected for international competitions.

[DCAmateurBoxing]

I do think you should give credit to boxers who win and not just those who enter the most tournaments. There are boxers who only go to one tournament a year and do very well, but don't get ranked very high in the USA Boxing rankings because there are many boxers who compete in all 3 ranking tournaments and are selected for international competitions.

What do you feel the purpose of a rankings system should be? IMO, I think it should attempt to list the best boxers and I think head-to-head competition should be part of that. I guess the thinking is that by using the selected tournaments you are reducing the number of variables that can affect a boxer's chances of winning (i.e. judging). I keep thinking about my example of the boxer who defeats nationally ranked boxers but isn't ranked because of the fact he or she may not attend national tournaments. . .

[boxmel]

Smith's rankings will be fun to watch and debate, however they do not impact who gets picked by USAB to go where, nor should they. And, no, I don't have any total results from the Ohio State Fair. Matter of fact, I don't have ANY results from the OSF. It's hard to get results from invitationals (Black Gloves, OSF, etc.).

[DCAmateurBoxing]

Smith's rankings will be fun to watch and debate, however they do not impact who gets picked by USAB to go where, nor should they. And, no, I don't have any total results from the Ohio State Fair. Matter of fact, I don't have ANY results from the OSF. It's hard to get results from invitationals (Black Gloves, OSF, etc.).

I agree with you, Mel. What do you think about amateur boxing rankings considering or not considering who a boxer defeats in the actual calculation of the rankings? (Apart from the actual work that it would entail. . . I'm just talking in theory here)

[boxmel]

I agree with you, Mel. What do you think about amateur boxing rankings considering or not considering who a boxer defeats in the actual calculation of the rankings? (Apart from the actual work that it would entail. . . I'm just talking in theory here

I think a ranking is more impressive and worthy if they are gained in a small number of ranking tournaments (we currently have 3) against other elite or semi-elite boxers. Having rankings based on who beat who at a local show or invitational doesn't produce a true picture, in my opinion. An elite boxer can lose on any given day but that doesn't mean his opponent is better. How many times have we seen a ranked/elite boxer beat only to have the boxer who beat him lose in the next round or so? Factoring in wins or losses at other than ranking tournaments would definitely water down said rankings to be almost meaningless (much like the number of title "belts" now available in the pros).