Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Always good for a laugh. 
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101369
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101369
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
What does L* mean?Lennox wrote: ↑31 Dec 2017, 11:01 Latest rankings uploaded;
www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
L* is when the fighter officially lost but there was sufficient subjective evidence that the result was grossly unfair and therefore the points allocation were altered.Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑03 Jan 2018, 07:21What does L* mean?Lennox wrote: ↑31 Dec 2017, 11:01 Latest rankings uploaded;
www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Hmm, that's a hairy business to be in....Lennox wrote: ↑03 Jan 2018, 14:06L* is when the fighter officially lost but there was sufficient subjective evidence that the result was grossly unfair and therefore the points allocation were altered.Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑03 Jan 2018, 07:21What does L* mean?Lennox wrote: ↑31 Dec 2017, 11:01 Latest rankings uploaded;
www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101369
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
I take it ~ is the opposite. I seen it place near a number (win) for example Hassan N'Dam ..Lennox wrote: ↑03 Jan 2018, 14:06L* is when the fighter officially lost but there was sufficient subjective evidence that the result was grossly unfair and therefore the points allocation were altered.Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑03 Jan 2018, 07:21What does L* mean?Lennox wrote: ↑31 Dec 2017, 11:01 Latest rankings uploaded;
www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Really dig this ranking system. Good job. 
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Not a bad list...
Pulev bit too low.
Hammer, Teper and Duhaupas too high.
Not too far of anyways
Pulev bit too low.
Hammer, Teper and Duhaupas too high.
Not too far of anyways
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101369
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
-
Mimmy
- Heavyweight

Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Before I take a peek can one tell me if this list has Tyson Fury in it?
If not I take it as a decent reliable list thats worth peeking.
If not I take it as a decent reliable list thats worth peeking.
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101369
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
So is this the place we should all look for credible rankings? Just curious, as all seem to have an agenda of some sort.
I notice they have Manny Pacquiao ranked 3rd at welterweight, for example.
I notice they have Manny Pacquiao ranked 3rd at welterweight, for example.
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
is there an agenda in computerized rankings. how is that built into the system for particular biases?
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Ok then. I can see Duhaupas being there. Helenius and Charr are pretty good names. But who has Teper fought? Only Duhaupas there for him.... And I actually scored that fight for Duhaupas at the time.
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101369
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
Quick question..Lennox wrote: ↑31 Dec 2017, 11:01 Latest rankings uploaded;
www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200
WASAKIL WANGEK THA 31 WBC W L W W W W W W 16 63 W W W W W W W 1 W 2
I'm sure Wangek didn't fight in between his two Chocolatito fights did he? This would suggest he did.
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101369
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Premier Boxing Organisation Top 100 rankings
JESSE MAGDALENO is not showing an L after the Dogboe loss