Eastman ranked at 168?

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 05 Oct 2004, 13:03

Have I missed something...why is Eastman ranked by BoxRec at super-middle?

Freiheit · Post by **Freiheit** » 05 Oct 2004, 13:07

Because he weighed 168lbs in his last fight

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 05 Oct 2004, 13:16

i really think boxrec should have fighters in their known division rather than what they fought at last....

Eastman is one example of a guy who came in heavy against a bigger opponent in a non title fight..

Erik teymour is also ranked at light heavy even though he is a super middle, a lot of his fights have been same day weigh in (his last one for example) so he is clearly going to be over the championship limit.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 05 Oct 2004, 13:22

Freiheit wrote:Because he weighed 168lbs in his last fight

Thanks. But you are going to cause yourselves an UNBELIEVABLE amount of bother with your rankings, both world and for individual countries, if you use what a fighter actually weighed in a non-title fight to base his division on.

Freiheit · Post by **Freiheit** » 05 Oct 2004, 13:26

I think this has something to do with the ABC criteria. Ie fightfax also ranks after weight in last fight. On boxrec you are allowed to be a bit overweight, ie the dlh/hopkins ranking. Its either that or a strict limit like fightfax, so if you weigh 160 1/4 you are a supermiddleweight.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 05 Oct 2004, 13:30

Freiheit wrote:I think this has something to do with the ABC criteria. Ie fightfax also ranks after weight in last fight. On boxrec you are allowed to be a bit overweight, ie the dlh/hopkins ranking. Its either that or a strict limit like fightfax, so if you weigh 160 1/4 you are a supermiddleweight.

Yes, I suppose computerised rankings make things like this inevitable, as the human element is removed. No system is perfect.

As we say in England, 'horses for courses'.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 05 Oct 2004, 13:41

I believe fighters should be judged on what they weigh for their last three fights.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 05 Oct 2004, 15:08

Hopkins No.1 at Light Middleweight?

computerrank · Post by **computerrank** » 05 Oct 2004, 15:15

bennie wrote:I believe fighters should be judged on what they weigh for their last three fights.

For discussion of weight and boxrec ratings have a look at:

http://www.boxrec.com/phpBB2/viewtopic. ... 0d0#197473

best regards
Martin

bigynzing · Post by **bigynzing** » 05 Oct 2004, 15:43

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:
Freiheit wrote:I think this has something to do with the ABC criteria. Ie fightfax also ranks after weight in last fight. On boxrec you are allowed to be a bit overweight, ie the dlh/hopkins ranking. Its either that or a strict limit like fightfax, so if you weigh 160 1/4 you are a supermiddleweight.
Yes, I suppose computerised rankings make things like this inevitable, as the human element is removed. No system is perfect.

As we say in England, 'horses for courses'.

i believe in some parts of england its "Horses for sex"