Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived

[computerrank]

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

Tunney / Gibbons:

Greb boxed at 167 lbs - so it was a win against a light heavyweight for Tunney, whatever weight he had.

Gibbons' defining bout was against Norfolk at light heavyweight within 12 months before the bout.

So for both the opponent competition level was at light heavyweight,

But at whatever weight division the bouts are assigned to - the rating points are relative to the division - not absolute.

TD Lopes / Alvarez;

Yes, if it went to the scorecards, it was a real draw. But often no contest results are recorded as technical decision draws. So there is a bad mix. I will go into it. Perhaps we could find a solution.

[computerrank]

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 ??????????????

Michael, as promised I will go into it - needs time.

[Manrae]

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

Tunney / Gibbons:

Greb boxed at 167 lbs - so it was a win against a light heavyweight for Tunney, whatever weight he had.

Gibbons' defining bout was against Norfolk at light heavyweight within 12 months before the bout.

So for both the opponent competition level was at light heavyweight,

But at whatever weight division the bouts are assigned to - the rating points are relative to the division - not absolute.

TD Lopes / Alvarez;

Yes, if it went to the scorecards, it was a real draw. But often no contest results are recorded as technical decision draws. So there is a bad mix. I will go into it. Perhaps we could find a solution.

According to boxrec, it went to the judges' scorecards
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:12397

https://youtu.be/wmSrKvFOT_Q
Video proof as well

Gibbons/Tunney

I'm confused as to how Greb/Tunney can be considered a heavyweight bout but this isn't. Are you saying that despite the editors placing the bout at heavyweight, their ratings are reflective to what they actually weighed in as?

[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 ??????????????

Michael, as promised I will go into it - needs time.

thank you Martin realized wait!

[Manrae]

Is he still on vacation?

[computerrank]

Is he still on vacation?

Back since Sunday

[Manrae]

Is he still on vacation?

Back since Sunday

So about what I posted about Rosendo Alvarez ?

[computerrank]

Is he still on vacation?

Back since Sunday

So about what I posted about Rosendo Alvarez ?

This bout is recorded with result=D (draw) and decision=TD (technical decision). Which is correct.

BoxRec currently has 4096 bouts with this status D/TD.

But most of them probably should be recorded with ND (no decision). So the program currently cannot simply regard these results as draws also.

BoxRec will have to find a way to seperate the results.

[computerrank]

Back since Sunday

So about what I posted about Rosendo Alvarez ?

This bout is recorded with result=D (draw) and decision=TD (technical decision). Which is correct.

BoxRec currently has 4096 bouts with this status D/TD.

But most of them probably should be recorded with ND (no decision). So the program currently cannot simply regard these results as draws also.

BoxRec will have to find a way to seperate the results.

There are 177 of them, where we have at least 4 rounds boxed and score cards
with a draw result (draw, majority draw or split draw).

These 177 bouts will be regarded as draws within the ratings. Small
improvement ...

[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 ??????????????

Michael, as promised I will go into it - needs time.

hi Martin! so the rating of the provider and Saul Alvarez??????????

[Manrae]

Back since Sunday

So about what I posted about Rosendo Alvarez ?

This bout is recorded with result=D (draw) and decision=TD (technical decision). Which is correct.

BoxRec currently has 4096 bouts with this status D/TD.

But most of them probably should be recorded with ND (no decision). So the program currently cannot simply regard these results as draws also.

BoxRec will have to find a way to seperate the results.

It's not a technical draw, it's a draw, there's a difference. A technical draw is sort of the same as a no contest, since the judges have no impact on the outcome. Alvarez-Lopez was a draw, the judges rendered it so, just like it could've been rendered a victory for either man. Although it had to end prematurely, it makes no sense that neither guy gets credit for the excellent fight that it was. Further more, it REALLY hurts Alvarez as his rating dropped significantly for the rematch making the Lopez win seem not as important as it really was.

I'm sorry but, this is just flat out wrong. Alvarez basically received no credit for a bout he arguably won against the great Ricardo Lopez.

[JCS]

An 8 round legit draw should probably mean something to Alvarez.... it should also ward off the quality performance drop as well..

Scorecards are available and it is past 3 rounds, so it seems logical to treat it as some type of reduced draw.

[computerrank]

An 8 round legit draw should probably mean something to Alvarez.... it should also ward off the quality performance drop as well..

Scorecards are available and it is past 3 rounds, so it seems logical to treat it as some type of reduced draw.

Rosendo vs Alvarez is part of the 177 D/TD bouts, where we have at least 4 rounds boxed and score cards
with a draw result (draw, majority draw or split draw).

These 177 bouts will be regarded as draws within the ratings. Small
improvement ...

[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.

Rosendo vs Alvarez is part of the 177 D/TD bouts, where we have at least 4 rounds boxed and score cards
with a draw result (draw, majority draw or split draw).

These 177 bouts will be regarded as draws within the ratings. Small
improvement ...

[computerrank]

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 ??????????????

Michael, as promised I will go into it - needs time.

thank you Martin realized wait!

Hi Michael,

there was a change with release 29_c on 2017-03-11 - I announced it here:
http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 5#p4612669

With the new release the point deduction for missing opponent quality not only depends on the relative level of the best opponent within 18 months. It now additionally depends on the length of time the requirement was violated.

Because the Washington bout was 13 months after the Szpilka bout the reduction was smaller than it would have been after 18 months.

[mike1989]

Michael, as promised I will go into it - needs time.

thank you Martin realized wait!

Hi Michael,

there was a change with release 29_c on 2017-03-11 - I announced it here:
http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... 5#p4612669

With the new release the point deduction for missing opponent quality not only depends on the relative level of the best opponent within 18 months. It now additionally depends on the length of time the requirement was violated.

Because the Washington bout was 13 months after the Szpilka bout the reduction was smaller than it would have been after 18 months.

referring to the example of Saul Alvarez ???

[mike1989]

[quote="mike1989"][quote="computerrank"]


hi Martin, please explain how the ratings dropped Mayweather ???

[mike1989]

hi Martin, please explain how the ratings dropped Mayweather ???

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 : 1976/2-176=812; 1976-812= 1164 points;
2015-09-12...2017-03-12 :1164/2= 582; 1164-582= 582 points current rating of Mayweather or I something did not consider????

[computerrank]

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 : 1976/2-176=812; 1976-812= 1164 points;
2015-09-12...2017-03-12 :1164/2= 582; 1164-582= 582 points current rating of Mayweather or I something did not consider????

Michael,
as I just said, reduction now additionally depends on the length of time the requirement was violated.

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 :
- best bout against Berto on 2015-09-12. New fix point is 2015-09-12 and the reduced ratings is 1744 points (requirement only 4.3 months violated).
Mayweather 2015-09-12...2017-03-12:
- no bout. New fix point is 2017-03-12 and the reduced ratings is 874 points.

[mike1989]

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 : 1976/2-176=812; 1976-812= 1164 points;
2015-09-12...2017-03-12 :1164/2= 582; 1164-582= 582 points current rating of Mayweather or I something did not consider????

Michael,
as I just said, reduction now additionally depends on the length of time the requirement was violated.

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 :
- best bout against Berto on 2015-09-12. New fix point is 2015-09-12 and the reduced ratings is 1744 points (requirement only 4.3 months violated).
Mayweather 2015-09-12...2017-03-12:
- no bout. New fix point is 2017-03-12 and the reduced ratings is 874 points.

Martin can be exemplified by Mayweather Andre Berto formula ???

[computerrank]

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 : 1976/2-176=812; 1976-812= 1164 points;
2015-09-12...2017-03-12 :1164/2= 582; 1164-582= 582 points current rating of Mayweather or I something did not consider????

Michael,
as I just said, reduction now additionally depends on the length of time the requirement was violated.

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 :
- best bout against Berto on 2015-09-12. New fix point is 2015-09-12 and the reduced ratings is 1744 points (requirement only 4.3 months violated).
Mayweather 2015-09-12...2017-03-12:
- no bout. New fix point is 2017-03-12 and the reduced ratings is 874 points.

Martin can be exemplified by Mayweather Andre Berto formula ???

18 months = 548 days (set by BoxRec ratings)
datedif("2015-05-02";"2015-09-12","d") = 133 days = days_violated

if rating_old > 10:

rating_reduced = 10 + (rating_old-10) * ( 1 - 0.5 * (1 - best_opp / rating_old * 2)) ** (days_violated / 548)

Mayweather / Andre Berto reduction:
rating_reduced = 10 + (1977 - 10) * ( 1 - 0.5 * ( 1 - 176 / 1977 * 2)) ** (133 / 548)
= 10 + 1967 * (1 - 0.5 * 0.822) ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.589 ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.879 = 10 + 1730 = 1740

[mike1989]

Michael,
as I just said, reduction now additionally depends on the length of time the requirement was violated.

Mayweather 2015-05-02...2016-11-02 :
- best bout against Berto on 2015-09-12. New fix point is 2015-09-12 and the reduced ratings is 1744 points (requirement only 4.3 months violated).
Mayweather 2015-09-12...2017-03-12:
- no bout. New fix point is 2017-03-12 and the reduced ratings is 874 points.

Martin can be exemplified by Mayweather Andre Berto formula ???

18 months = 548 days (set by BoxRec ratings)
datedif("2015-05-02";"2015-09-12","d") = 133 days = days_violated

if rating_old > 10:

rating_reduced = 10 + (rating_old-10) * ( 1 - 0.5 * (1 - best_opp / rating_old * 2)) ** (days_violated / 548)

Mayweather / Andre Berto reduction:
rating_reduced = 10 + (1977 - 10) * ( 1 - 0.5 * ( 1 - 176 / 1977 * 2)) ** (133 / 548)
= 10 + 1967 * (1 - 0.5 * 0.822) ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.589 ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.879 = 10 + 1730 = 1740

Martin I don't understand that : 0.589 ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.879 ??????

[computerrank]

Martin can be exemplified by Mayweather Andre Berto formula ???

18 months = 548 days (set by BoxRec ratings)
datedif("2015-05-02";"2015-09-12","d") = 133 days = days_violated

if rating_old > 10:

rating_reduced = 10 + (rating_old-10) * ( 1 - 0.5 * (1 - best_opp / rating_old * 2)) ** (days_violated / 548)

Mayweather / Andre Berto reduction:
rating_reduced = 10 + (1977 - 10) * ( 1 - 0.5 * ( 1 - 176 / 1977 * 2)) ** (133 / 548)
= 10 + 1967 * (1 - 0.5 * 0.822) ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.589 ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.879 = 10 + 1730 = 1740

Martin I don't understand that : 0.589 ** 0.243 = 10 + 1967 * 0.879 ??????

The operator ** means exponentiation
0.589 ** 0.243 means 0.589 to the power of 0.243

You know it from the square:

4 ** 2 = 4 to the power of 2 =the square of 4 = 4 * 4 = 16

[mike1989]

The operator ** means exponentiation
0.589 ** 0.243 means 0.589 to the power of 0.243

You know it from the square:

4 ** 2 = 4 to the power of 2 =the square of 4 = 4 * 4 = 16

Martin I pravilno understand ???:
Saul Alvarez: 2015-11-21...2017-05-21
2015-11-21...2016-05-07 = 168 days
10+(1353-10)*(1-0,5*(1-351/1353*2))**(168/548)= 10+1343*(1-0,5*0,481)**0,307=10+1343*0,760**0,307= 1244 point

right????

this formula I find good )...

[computerrank]

Martin I pravilno understand ???:
Saul Alvarez: 2015-11-21...2017-05-21
2015-11-21...2016-05-07 = 168 days
10+(1353-10)*(1-0,5*(1-351/1353*2))**(168/548)= 10+1343*(1-0,5*0,481)**0,307=10+1343*0,760**0,307= 1244 point

right????

this formula I find good )...