Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived

[John]

Can I ask real quick before getting into why I'm posting...why can't I send someone a PM? I think I've been registered here for at least a year or two, maybe longer. I'm on the site every other day...is it because of my inactivity in the forums..? That's a bit on the lame side, seeing as to how I've never used a forum which prohibits the use of certain site features for any reason other than amount of time elapsed since registering.
Anyways in regards to the thread...I've read the rules breakdown before, probably 2-3 times. What I'm wondering about is the bout ratings. I've always thought of something regarded as a five star fight to be a fight worthy of five stars based on the fight that took place...not the fight that WILL take place. That's just a formula spitting out a number based on the two boxers individual ratings. I am hereby making my recommendation of an overhaul to the bout rating system, and volunteering to spearhead the campaign. I'll lay out (my version of/ideas for) the new rating system, I'll go back and apply ratings to previous bouts, and ill rate current/future fights.
I believe most boxing fans, like me, want to be able to see which fights, past and present, are worth watching, and which might be a waste of their time. I know that when I got really into watching all the classics, I sometimes spent an hour watching a 15 rounder that, upon its conclusion, left me wishing I could get that hour of my life back...and sometimes finding a real gem that seemed to go all but unnoticed.
Anyway, if someone can let me know if that's something people want, of the folks who run this site want, I'm eager to find out.

No, the whole point of the ratings is that they are not subjective opinion, they are generated statistically.

[JCS]

Martin...

Based on historical results, how often do you figure a miracle happens?

In other words, between two boxers, neither has a 0% or 100% chance of winning.. it really lies in between someplace. I'm not entirely sure how to best come up with the extent of this range through history, but maybe you do?

[computerrank]

Jason, just in Irland for 4 weeks. Perhaps a 3 sigma event would make the noteable exception. I will look into that after my trip.

[JCS]

Interesting movement...


2013-02-28
Oxandia Castillo
9➞274

TKO 2

Hanna Gabriels
128➞63


Seems pretty crazy that Castillo jumped from 9 to 274 points, given that Gabriels was only at 128.

[mike1989]

why Saul Alvarez is not removed point for the lack of a strong opozicii he must now be a detonation of 1000 points and not more than 1100

[JCS]

why Saul Alvarez is not removed point for the lack of a strong opozicii he must now be a detonation of 1000 points and not more than 1100

Say what?

I think he's fine until he beats Golovkin or until November.

[Manrae]

Interesting movement...


2013-02-28
Oxandia Castillo
9➞274

TKO 2

Hanna Gabriels
128➞63


Seems pretty crazy that Castillo jumped from 9 to 274 points, given that Gabriels was only at 128.

It's the pre-ranking bonus points... I think.

[mike1989]

why Saul Alvarez is not removed point for the lack of a strong opozicii he must now be a detonation of 1000 points and not more than 1100

Say what?


I think he's fine until he beats Golovkin or until November.

1.5 years passed when Alvarez was the opponent with a rating of 50% from Rainha Alvarez's bout against Cotto ???

[JCS]

why Saul Alvarez is not removed point for the lack of a strong opozicii he must now be a detonation of 1000 points and not more than 1100

Say what?


I think he's fine until he beats Golovkin or until November.

1.5 years passed when Alvarez was the opponent with a rating of 50% from Rainha Alvarez's bout against Cotto ???

What is Rainha?

[computerrank]

Interesting movement...


2013-02-28
Oxandia Castillo
9➞274

TKO 2

Hanna Gabriels
128➞63


Seems pretty crazy that Castillo jumped from 9 to 274 points, given that Gabriels was only at 128.

It's the pre-ranking bonus points... I think.

Correct ...

[computerrank]

why Saul Alvarez is not removed point for the lack of a strong opozicii he must now be a detonation of 1000 points and not more than 1100

Say what?


I think he's fine until he beats Golovkin or until November.

1.5 years passed when Alvarez was the opponent with a rating of 50% from Rainha Alvarez's bout against Cotto ???

He lost points - he now has less points than his last super middleweight rating converted​ to middleweight.

[mike1989]

1.5 years passed when Alvarez was the opponent with a rating of 50% from Rainha Alvarez's bout against Cotto ???

He lost points - he now has less points than his last super middleweight rating converted​ to middleweight.

after Miguel Cotto Saul Alvarez opponent with the highest rating was Amir Khan on this reset consists of the following 1355/2= 677,5-350= 327,5 because 1355-327,5= 1029 paynow in the super middleweight Welterweight and even less

[JCS]

Interesting movement...


2013-02-28
Oxandia Castillo
9➞274

TKO 2

Hanna Gabriels
128➞63


Seems pretty crazy that Castillo jumped from 9 to 274 points, given that Gabriels was only at 128.

It's the pre-ranking bonus points... I think.

Correct ...

Given the prior history of Castillo and Gabriels' pre-bout rating.. that kind of jump seems quite extreme, don't you think?

[computerrank]

It's the pre-ranking bonus points... I think.

was
Correct ...

Given the prior history of Castillo and Gabriels' pre-bout rating.. that kind of jump seems quite extreme, don't you think?

Gabriel's was #1 and the division level was good enough.

[Manrae]

For the all time boxer ratings... Shouldn't Bernard Hopkins be listed at middleweight?

[computerrank]

For the all time boxer ratings... Shouldn't Bernard Hopkins be listed at middleweight?

Yes, he should. But he will be listed at his last weight as long as he might fight again ....

[computerrank]

He lost points - he now has less points than his last super middleweight rating converted​ to middleweight.

after Miguel Cotto Saul Alvarez opponent with the highest rating was Amir Khan on this reset consists of the following 1355/2= 677,5-350= 327,5 because 1355-327,5= 1029 paynow in the super middleweight Welterweight and even less

Michael, I am on tour in Ireland until end of July. I will go into the details when home.

[mike1989]

after Miguel Cotto Saul Alvarez opponent with the highest rating was Amir Khan on this reset consists of the following 1355/2= 677,5-350= 327,5 because 1355-327,5= 1029 paynow in the super middleweight Welterweight and even less

Michael, I am on tour in Ireland until end of July. I will go into the details when home.

okay Martin)... I still have questions all the time )... good rest !)

[mike1989]

the downgrade by Deontay Wilder was not right. Took 46 points then the opponent's rating was supposed to be 110 points???

the highest rating of an opponent for Wilder : Gerald Washington 92 point because (311/2)-92= 63,5 points ie 64 point.

Because the new stars out Deontay Wilder 247 point ??????????????

[Manrae]

I'm confused about Gene Tunney's ratings jump when he faced Tommy Gibbons...
http://boxrec.com/bout/22124

Why did it jump up so high, pre-bout?


Also, why did Rosendo Alvarez's rating drop so low, pre-bout, for the rematch with Ricardo Lopez?

http://boxrec.com/bout/12932

[computerrank]

I'm confused about Gene Tunney's ratings jump when he faced Tommy Gibbons...
http://boxrec.com/bout/22124

Why did it jump up so high, pre-bout?


Also, why did Rosendo Alvarez's rating drop so low, pre-bout, for the rematch with Ricardo Lopez?

http://boxrec.com/bout/12932

Tunney came from heavyweight to light heavyweight in this bout.

Alvarez vs Lopez 1 was a TD draw and the result didn't count at all. So at time of their rematch Alvarez hat no valid bout within his last 18 months.

[Manrae]

I'm confused about Gene Tunney's ratings jump when he faced Tommy Gibbons...
http://boxrec.com/bout/22124

Why did it jump up so high, pre-bout?


Also, why did Rosendo Alvarez's rating drop so low, pre-bout, for the rematch with Ricardo Lopez?

http://boxrec.com/bout/12932

Tunney came from heavyweight to light heavyweight in this bout.

Alvarez vs Lopez 1 was a TD draw and the result didn't count at all. So at time of their rematch Alvarez hat no valid bout within his last 18 months.

Draws don't count as results? So you're saying I could jump in the ring, get a draw against Canelo Alvarez, Andre Ward, and Terrence Crawford consecutively and it means nothing?

Gibbons was a heavyweight, both weighed in as heavyweights (as you know heavyweights were much smaller than now), how is this being considered a light heavyweight bout? They both had moved up to heavyweight prior to their bout as well.

[computerrank]

...
Draws don't count as results? So you're saying I could jump in the ring, get a draw against Canelo Alvarez, Andre Ward, and Terrence Crawford consecutively and it means nothing?

Gibbons was a heavyweight, both weighed in as heavyweights (as you know heavyweights were much smaller than now), how is this being considered a light heavyweight bout? They both had moved up to heavyweight prior to their bout as well.

TD:

Draws do count - it is only a draw based on a technical decision TD, which does not count - it is the decision, that there cannot be found a result for technical reasons. I does not mean, that the boxers fought an even result.

Gibbons vs Tunney:

The editors didn't explicitly assign this bout to a weight division. Their bout weight was slightly above light heavyweight. But in the year before the bout they both had their best bouts at light heavyweight.

[Manrae]

...
Draws don't count as results? So you're saying I could jump in the ring, get a draw against Canelo Alvarez, Andre Ward, and Terrence Crawford consecutively and it means nothing?

Gibbons was a heavyweight, both weighed in as heavyweights (as you know heavyweights were much smaller than now), how is this being considered a light heavyweight bout? They both had moved up to heavyweight prior to their bout as well.

TD:

Draws do count - it is only a draw based on a technical decision TD, which does not count - it is the decision, that there cannot be found a result for technical reasons. I does not mean, that the boxers fought an even result.

Gibbons vs Tunney:

The editors didn't explicitly assign this bout to a weight division. Their bout weight was slightly above light heavyweight. But in the year before the bout they both had their best bouts at light heavyweight.

Tunney v Smith, December 1924
http://boxrec.com/show/15478

Heavyweight, along with his next bout, against 167lb Greb, Heavyweight. He hadn't officially weighed in as a light heavyweight since October of '24. The fight with Gibbons was specifically to set up a fight against the heavyweight champ of the world, Dempsey, which would occur the following year.

Gibbons' previous bout was also at heavyweight. He was officially a heavyweight per Ring magazine annual ratings for 1924.

I understand that keeping accurate records on these sorts of things is difficult, sometimes I wonder if it should even matter at all. But that dramatic ratings jump just doesn't seem right... Perhaps there shouldn't be a bonus for jumping down in weight?


As far as the Lopez-Alvarez TD is concerned, it was a technical decision draw via the scorecards, not the cut caused via incidental foul. It should definitely count, no question. I could understand if it's a TD simply because the fight had to be stopped before the completion ofthe 4th round, but I think you're mistaken on the results here. The judges rendered a verdict after the doctor stoppage, they decided the outcome, not the foul. ....with that said, it was a great fight that many people thought Alvarez actually won but, that's uo to the viewer

[mike1989]

the downgrade by Deontay Wilder was not right. Took 46 points then the opponent's rating was supposed to be 110 points???

the highest rating of an opponent for Wilder : Gerald Washington 92 point because (311/2)-92= 63,5 points ie 64 point.

Because the new stars out Deontay Wilder 247 point ??????????????