New Rankings

[Jma05]

I am a very big amatuer boxing fan who has decided to give my opinion in my own kind of rankings coming up in 2010. My rankings will be based on many kinds of national tournaments. My National rankings will consist of many age divisions such as the 9-10, 11-12, 13-14, 15-16 17-18, Mens. Here our the tournaments that i will base my rankings off of for the diffrent age divisions.


9/10- (National Junior Golden Gloves, Ringside Worlds)
11/12- (National silver gloves, National junior Golden Gloves, National Pal, Ringside worlds)
13/14- (Same as the 11-12 division)
15/16 -( Same as the 13-14 division but also including the National Junior Olympics)
17/18 -( Under-19 Nationals, National Golden Gloves, National Pal, Usa Senior Nationals, Ringside Worlds and with the tournaments some how finding out who is 17-18 years old)
Mens -(Same as 17-18 except the Under-19 Nationals


Any weight classes that our competed in shall have a national ranking for in any age division

My Rankings will consist for only the top of so many in for each division.

Top 5 for 9-10
Top 6 for 11-12
Top 6 for 13-14
Top 8 for 15-16
Top 5 for 17-18
Top 10 for Mens


So hopefully i can bring a little bit of adjustment from my opinion to usa amatuer boxing

[415BOXING]

I like the idea of your rankings,but to bad you don't go top 10 in all age groups,also how about giving lesser points for regional tournaments like the desert showdown in California,I'm sire there are other regional tournaments across the country that could be cosidered.The reason I say this is because alot of kids can't make all the big tournaments but can make some of the regional tournaments.How about giving a certain amount of points if 2 top ten fighters box at a local show,shouldn't the winner receive some extra points on that win?I'm sure there are enough people on this site who would report if 2 top ten guys box each other.

[Dennis]

I like a variety of rankings as it gets people talking about the sport of amateur boxing.

[Dennis]

It really helps if you go to the tournaments and see the boxers and the bouts. Many of the tournaments don't give the results of all the bouts. They will just list the winners.

[DCAmateurBoxing]

I'm all for your efforts. It's a start and I agree, it gets people talking. I also agree that for some of your divisions, going off the tourneys only is a little biased because a lot of the top boxers may not attend all and in some cases like the Natl. Silvers --many of the top boxers get knocked off by top boxers. I don't know how to address that, I'm just throwing it out there. I know that Mel will kill me for saying this, but I think that if you can't see these kids in action (especially when the top face the top), you may want to consider at least seeing video. I think that anything that get's people talking about amateur boxing and recognizing boxers at all levels will be a good thing. Good luck and I can't wait to see what you come up with.

[Jma05]

i dont think i wil be able to go to alot of the tournaments since i am only 18 but i somewhat i agree with you on the local tourney things and regional tourneys as well. but also understand i will need alot of help to do this to. not just from 1 person. just as people being able to give me the results from the tournaments. and if you all help i promise i will do my best to make these rankings. i shall update them everytime i hear of a change

[DCAmateurBoxing]

i dont think i wil be able to go to alot of the tournaments since i am only 18 but i somewhat i agree with you on the local tourney things and regional tourneys as well. but also understand i will need alot of help to do this to. not just from 1 person. just as people being able to give me the results from the tournaments. and if you all help i promise i will do my best to make these rankings. i shall update them everytime i hear of a change

The other thing I didn't even mention was that the JO weighs change so much w/ the younger boxers, that will have to be taken into account too. I would help as much I can. Like I said, we have to start somewhere right?

[Jma05]

thank you i really do appreciate much help. what i will do is adjust the weights to where they our the main weight classes aroud that size. i will definently work on that. that was a good point though and thank you for bringing that up. but yes it will be alot work and i will appreciate anyones help nd we shall see how good i am. but please remember if i make a mistake i am only human lol so let the new year start and i shall try and get it together

[Dennis]

Set up a separate forum or sticky thread for the rankings with another thread for people to post comments and recommendations. If each regional area will send you info about boxers in their area and info about shows where the local #1 got beat by Boxer A then you can take that info into account.

For example I can tell you that Dorian Anthony is a better boxer than his #10 ranking in the 178#/81kg class. I won't be surprised a bit to see him move up in the rankings in 2010.

[415BOXING]

I agree partial points should be given for regional tournaments,if you give 10 points for winning a major tournament,give 4 points for winning a regional tourney and 2 points for coming in second.The Desert Showdown should be the regional tourney for the West.How about the Ohio State Fair for the Midwest?The Title tourney for the South & Southeast?I'm sure there are other tournaments for the other regions.There are enough people to report results from the regional tournaments & fights between top ten boxers on this site

[Jma05]

yes i agree but i think thats gonna be a little hard for trying to find all the regional results lol im not just gonna judge on points but also to by who beats who. some what like michael smiths rankings our based off

[boxmel]

I know that Mel will kill me for saying this, but I think that if you can't see these kids in action (especially when the top face the top), you may want to consider at least seeing video.

Now - WHY would I kill you? Sheesh! However, rankings are never based on "how" a boxer looks but where they placed in a given tournament, i.e., won, second place, etc. Remember - even the best boxer can have a bad day and look like caca even though winning.

[DCAmateurBoxing]

I know that Mel will kill me for saying this, but I think that if you can't see these kids in action (especially when the top face the top), you may want to consider at least seeing video.

Now - WHY would I kill you? Sheesh! However, rankings are never based on "how" a boxer looks but where they placed in a given tournament, i.e., won, second place, etc. Remember - even the best boxer can have a bad day and look like caca even though winning.

I feared death because I mentioned using that ridiculous, evil medium called video and using it to make a judgement. I completely agree with you though, a win is a win. In almost all other athletic ranking, teams or individuals don't get style points. I think "how a boxer looks" comes into play during the judging and a boxer is "penalized" for that with lower scores if they aren't on top of their game. However, since this is a ranking attempt that may not be 100% mathematical, if you are going to add subjectivity into it, it should be from watching the boxers (live or gulp, on video) and considering who they defeat (like the new USAB pt system does by weighting our points based on how well a boxer's winning opponent does in a tournament). I'm just trying to address the fact that I personally would have a problem ranking a boxer that I haven't seen box. That's my hangup.

Welcome back, Mel. Don't stay away so long next time.

[Rob Calloway]

I Love IT.... Glad to see people wanting to improve the Amateur game and it is Great Idea to have ranking system beginning with such young group. I know it may not be perfect but Nothing is. I Retired from long career and now want to get more involved with my Son Chase and the other youngsters on our Amateur Team at 'Team Calloway'.
I've seen a lot of you guys names on here before so please keep in touch and if there is any Tournament or Show we can attend.... we will be their.
Thanks Rob Calloway 75-11-2 60 KO's 40 Amateur Bouts

Team Calloway 816-232-2348
[email protected]
www.myspace.com//allamericanpromotions

[boxmel]

I feared death because I mentioned using that ridiculous, evil medium called video and using it to make a judgement.

I don't have a problem with video - it's just that, because it is only one point of view, it isn't a good medium for determining who won a bout.

In almost all other athletic ranking, teams or individuals don't get style points.

They don't in amateur boxing, either. Yes, "better style" IS one of the TIE BREAKERS in non-computerized scoring but rarely, if ever, used.

I think "how a boxer looks" comes into play during the judging and a boxer is "penalized" for that with lower scores if they aren't on top of their game.

I never consider how a boxer looks as part of my scoring criteria. Remember - a legal effective scoring blow is one that is landed in the scoring area with the white knuckle surface of the glove and the boxer is not committing a foul. I've judged some pretty ugly bouts in my day (novice SHW's come to mind) and I always focus on the few, if any, legal punches landed.

I'm just trying to address the fact that I personally would have a problem ranking a boxer that I haven't seen box. That's my hangup.

Yup - sure is since the people who rank in USAB don't always see the boxers competing.

Welcome back, Mel. Don't stay away so long next time.

I have to take a break periodically and let Dennis pontificate.

[Dennis]

I may pontificate but at at least I don't try to ostracize the big guys from amateur boxing like Mel does.

[boxmel]

I may pontificate but at at least I don't try to ostracize the big guys from amateur boxing like Mel does.

Now, Dennis, I do not condone nor perpetrate ostracization of "the big guys." They just ain't my favorite weight classes! DD

[Dennis]

I may pontificate but at at least I don't try to ostracize the big guys from amateur boxing like Mel does.

Now, Dennis, I do not condone nor perpetrate ostracization of "the big guys." They just ain't my favorite weight classes! DD

It is way too obvious that you don't like the HW and SHW. As a "big guy" it really hurts!