So you would prefer something like this?JCS wrote: ↑15 May 2019, 19:19 Right.. but...
As a result, Hopkins (for example) who generated considerable achievements in multiple divisions.. is limited to MW. Rightfully so, but he did a few things at LHW as well... I assume the LHW achievements inflate his MW rating as well.
Plenty of others fit this bill too...
Yes, but unfortunately it uncovers other issues... Jimmy Wilde is one.computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 04:58 So you would prefer something like this?
http://151.boxrec.com/~martin/ratings_at_test_div.php
<=1988 MIinimumweight -> Light Flyweight ## MinimumweightWBC, WBA, IBFJCS wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 14:33 Yes, but unfortunately it uncovers other issues... Jimmy Wilde is one.
What does his bout-by-bout division breakdown look like? I have to imagine he has unclassified bouts.. in a method like this, could those bouts be "defaulted" to the boxer's master setting (Flyweight in this case)?
Are you locking out certain divisions before they existed (Such as Minimumweight) and considering them as their equivalent at the time (Flyweight)?
How are Wilde's bouts treated that have no divisional classification? I have to assume there are a few.computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 14:54 <=1988 MIinimumweight -> Light Flyweight ## MinimumweightWBC, WBA, IBF
<=1975 Light Flyweight -> Flyweight ## Light Flyweight WBC, WBA
<=1981 Super Flyweight -> Bantamweight ## Super Flyweight WBC, WBA
<=1977 Super Bantamweigth -> Featherweight ## Super Bantamweight WBC, WBA
<=1963 Super Featherweight -> Lightweight ## Super Featherweight WBC, WBA
<=1962 Light Welteerweight -> Welterweight ## Light Welterweight WBC, WBA
<=1962 Light Middleweight -> Middleweight ## Light Middleweight WBC, WBA
<=1988 Super Middleweight -> Light Heavyweight ## Super Middleweight WBC, WBA, IBF
<=1982 Cruiserweight -> Heavyweight ## Cruiserweight WBC, WBA
If the bout is assigned to a division, it goes with this division.
Looks like Wilde got a ton of points at Bantam and Feather he probably shouldn't have.... because of the funky matchups, etc...computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:05 If the bout is assigned to a division, it goes with this division.
Otherwise If there are weights, it goes with the weight of the heavier boxer.
Ohterwise with the current weight division (traced within the ratings program run) of the boxer in the higher weight division.
Otherwise with the editor assigned weight division of the boxer in the higher weight division.
1919 he defeated Lynch at Bantamweight in his best bout this year
1916 alone probably bumps him up a few notches if fixed..computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:28 1919 he defeated Lynch at Bantamweight in his best bout this year
1918 he defeated Conn at Featherweight in his best bout this year
1916 he defeated Symonds at Flyweight in his best bout this year - but the program rated it at Bantamweight ???
All other years are Flyweight
Pretty significant...computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:34 Would bring him from #14 to #7 in Flyweight restricted perspective.
annual ratings updated ...Manrae wrote: ↑24 May 2019, 00:24 Were the boxrec annual ratings ever updated to reflect the new ratings?
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/BoxRe ... ht_Annuals
Also, have you ever considered an annual p4p rating page? Would it be difficult to implement?
Off Topic--I still can't get over that Deontay Wilder KO, geezus
Coolcomputerrank wrote: ↑24 May 2019, 06:13 annual ratings updated ...
annual p4p wouldn't be difficult, but I doubt it makes sense
Boxers are in the Boxrec lists (active) as long as they had a bout within the last year. But it is possible to set them inactive, e.g. when they retire.
Ruiz wasn't unranked, he was #15. And Joshua had double the points of Wilder. So Ruiz is #1 at Boxrec now.
Yeh. I mean look at Horn? One win over ManPac and 2 years later, he still has 500 points.computerrank wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 10:12 Ruiz wasn't unranked, he was #15. And Joshua had double the points of Wilder. So Ruiz is #1 at Boxrec now.
- has to be considered.