Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived

[Manrae]

Cool, hope you enjoyed your time away on vacation

We had a great time :-)

Regarding the ratings, I will wait until the issues with the new Boxrec release will be fixed ...

Cool, hope you didn't miss out on any boxing action while you were away

[m1kee50]

Hi Martin can I request some statistics if it is possible:

Can you tell me the average number of total fights for all boxers, either by year of birth, or year of debut?

Thanks in advance.

[computerrank]

Hi Martin can I request some statistics if it is possible:

Can you tell me the average number of total fights for all boxers, either by year of birth, or year of debut?

Thanks in advance.

You got an email ...

[m1kee50]

Hi Martin can I request some statistics if it is possible:

Can you tell me the average number of total fights for all boxers, either by year of birth, or year of debut?

Thanks in advance.

You got an email ...

Pm sent. Thanks

[jujigatame]

I think the Kownacki/Arreola fight is a bit of a sign that it's too easy to gain points in the current BoxRec system. Arreola only had 50 points and was barely in the top 50 of the division. A borderline top 10 guy with over 200 points should not be gaining 40+ points from a 9-3 decision win over an opponent that poor. He probably shouldn't be gaining any points at all from that victory.

[oogiebe]

I think the Kownacki/Arreola fight is a bit of a sign that it's too easy to gain points in the current BoxRec system. Arreola only had 50 points and was barely in the top 50 of the division. A borderline top 10 guy with over 200 points should not be gaining 40+ points from a 9-3 decision win over an opponent that poor. He probably shouldn't be gaining any points at all from that victory.

Especially as the fight wasn't a blowout. It was closer than the cards. I completely agree.

[margaret thatcher]

Hard for a computer to account for fights being closer than the cards though

[jujigatame]

Hard for a computer to account for fights being closer than the cards though

Agreed but that wasn't my point. A contender with 200+ points shouldn't be able to gain 40 points from a win over a C-lister with only 50 points, and ESPECIALLY not when he only won a 9-3 decision.

[computerrank]

Hard for a computer to account for fights being closer than the cards though

Agreed but that wasn't my point. A contender with 200+ points shouldn't be able to gain 40 points from a win over a C-lister with only 50 points, and ESPECIALLY not when he only won a 9-3 decision.

He got no regular points.

Additional points are rewarded for a win against an opponent within the top 15 percent of all active boxers. At most 40 points, but only as much points as the opponent had. And only if the opponent had a win against an opponent within the last 18 months and within the top 15 percent himself and no recent loss. Additional points are necessary to compensate for point losses in the system due to missing opponent quality, inactivity and career end.

9-3 is a clear decision from my perspective.

[jujigatame]

I mean whether it's "regular" points or "additional" points I think it's a flaw in the system. A fighter shouldn't be getting extra credit for beating a guy with less than 25% of his own total, particularly in a decision which could be described as "clear" but certainly not dominant.

The top 15% metric seems totally meaningless. According to BoxRec there are over 18,000 active boxers in the world.

[computerrank]

I mean whether it's "regular" points or "additional" points I think it's a flaw in the system. A fighter shouldn't be getting extra credit for beating a guy with less than 25% of his own total, particularly in a decision which could be described as "clear" but certainly not dominant.

The top 15% metric seems totally meaningless. According to BoxRec there are over 18,000 active boxers in the world.

The sytem, you describe, never starts from scratch 0 points. And if it would start from an initial points ranking, it would drain to 0 points for all.
It needs a bit more, to establish a meaningful rating.

[jujigatame]

That doesn't seem like a good justification for these sorts of bonuses which are extremely difficult to defend when looking at a fighter's record and point progression. I'm sure formulas can be tweaked to give winning fighters additional points from meaningful victories, rather than meaningless victories like this one.

[Lennox]

boxrec.com/en/proboxer/840266

Thanongsak Simsri
Quite how is this boxer number 20 in the world at Light-Flyweight

He might be good, he might not be, but as it stands he qualifies for a IBO world title shot because he is high enough in the boxrec rankings.

This is why Boxrec rankings are poor and this is how and undeserving fighter can be killed.

In PBO he has beaten only one top 100 ranked fighter Ricardo Sueno who was ranked 58 at the time. I can't think he would have beaten any Boxrec top 100 ranked fighter.....so how is he number 20 in the world?

[computerrank]

boxrec.com/en/proboxer/840266

Thanongsak Simsri
Quite how is this boxer number 20 in the world at Light-Flyweight

He might be good, he might not be, but as it stands he qualifies for a IBO world title shot because he is high enough in the boxrec rankings.

This is why Boxrec rankings are poor and this is how and undeserving fighter can be killed.

In PBO he has beaten only one top 100 ranked fighter Ricardo Sueno who was ranked 58 at the time. I can't think he would have beaten any Boxrec top 100 ranked fighter.....so how is he number 20 in the world?

At Boxrec Sueno was #46 at Fly and Simsri moved to #32 Fly with his win.

Simsri moved down to the much weaker Light Fly and this #32 Fly was equivalent to #21 Light Fly.

[SportsRatings]

boxrec.com/en/proboxer/840266

This is why Boxrec rankings are poor

I don't get it, every boxrec user has discovered "why Boxrec rankings are poor" so why don't they ever get fixed?

[Lennox]

boxrec.com/en/proboxer/840266

Thanongsak Simsri
Quite how is this boxer number 20 in the world at Light-Flyweight

He might be good, he might not be, but as it stands he qualifies for a IBO world title shot because he is high enough in the boxrec rankings.

This is why Boxrec rankings are poor and this is how and undeserving fighter can be killed.

In PBO he has beaten only one top 100 ranked fighter Ricardo Sueno who was ranked 58 at the time. I can't think he would have beaten any Boxrec top 100 ranked fighter.....so how is he number 20 in the world?

At Boxrec Sueno was #46 at Fly and Simsri moved to #32 Fly with his win.

Simsri moved down to the much weaker Light Fly and this #32 Fly was equivalent to #21 Light Fly.

This is why they are poor. You have a fighter with 10 fights, most of which are totally meaningless. He beats a fighter you had as 46th best, that puts him 32!!!! Computerrank explains with numbers, common sense would see that the fighter Simsri/Sueno should be ranked outside the top 50. You are playing a dangerous game elevating boxers into a position where they are deemed world level when they are unqualified. If one of these fighters ever dies somebody should be accountable for allowing the fight to happen. Computerrank does not have the boxing knowledge to understand the errors.

[JCS]

At Boxrec Sueno was #46 at Fly and Simsri moved to #32 Fly with his win.

Simsri moved down to the much weaker Light Fly and this #32 Fly was equivalent to #21 Light Fly.

This is why they are poor. You have a fighter with 10 fights, most of which are totally meaningless. He beats a fighter you had as 46th best, that puts him 32!!!! Computerrank explains with numbers, common sense would see that the fighter Simsri/Sueno should be ranked outside the top 50. You are playing a dangerous game elevating boxers into a position where they are deemed world level when they are unqualified. If one of these fighters ever dies somebody should be accountable for allowing the fight to happen. Computerrank does not have the boxing knowledge to understand the errors.

Total number of fights isn't a convenient statistic to validate an argument like this... whether or not this virtual unknown is overrated or not.. One can point to a boxer like Lomachenko and see right away.

[Lennox]

You are blind too JCS.
It is not about the number of fights at all,
Quality full stop. Its all the matters.

Pathetic how you people cant see beat number 80 then ranked 23....thats Boxrec lol

Look at Lomachenko's THREE NUMBER ONES!!!!!!

www.premierboxingorganisation.com/lightweight-135

[SportsRatings]

boxrec.com/en/proboxer/840266

Thanongsak Simsri
Quite how is this boxer number 20 in the world at Light-Flyweight

He might be good, he might not be, but as it stands he qualifies for a IBO world title shot because he is high enough in the boxrec rankings.

Do Boxrec's rankings have any bearing on IBO's title shots? IBO makes their own computerized rankings

And btw, Simsri is #19 in IBO's computer. Though they cull out the 5 champs so it's presumably the equivalent of #24, but pretty much the same.

[JCS]

You are blind too JCS.
It is not about the number of fights at all,
Quality full stop. Its all the matters.

Pathetic how you people cant see beat number 80 then ranked 23....thats Boxrec lol

Look at Lomachenko's THREE NUMBER ONES!!!!!!

www.premierboxingorganisation.com/lightweight-135

Here you go again.. using your own rankings as fuel for your own argument.

[Lennox]

boxrec.com/en/proboxer/840266

Thanongsak Simsri
Quite how is this boxer number 20 in the world at Light-Flyweight

He might be good, he might not be, but as it stands he qualifies for a IBO world title shot because he is high enough in the boxrec rankings.

Do Boxrec's rankings have any bearing on IBO's title shots? IBO makes their own computerized rankings

And btw, Simsri is #19 in IBO's computer. Though they cull out the 5 champs so it's presumably the equivalent of #24, but pretty much the same.

IBO have used Boxrec for the last few years.

[SportsRatings]

Do Boxrec's rankings have any bearing on IBO's title shots? IBO makes their own computerized rankings

And btw, Simsri is #19 in IBO's computer. Though they cull out the 5 champs so it's presumably the equivalent of #24, but pretty much the same.

IBO have used Boxrec for the last few years.

Well blow me down, they sure do. For five years now! I never heard about the change.

I think that's a bad move. I respected IBO for having their own rating system, and it seems like they're a bit...extraneous? if they job that out to someone else.

Their only claim to fame as an org was their ranking system....now they're just using someone else's rankings.

Also weird that they have Kevin Lerena as their Cruiserweight champ, how did that even happen?

Ah well, so much for the IBO.

[Lennox]

IBO have used Boxrec for the last few years.

Why don’t they look the same then?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... g_rankings

They take the champions up to 5 out. They take out their intercontinental champion then they are the same, but they are produced monthly so would be the same for that one day until updated.

[computerrank]

Why don’t they look the same then?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of ... g_rankings

They take the champions up to 5 out. They take out their intercontinental champion then they are the same, but they are produced monthly so would be the same for that one day until updated.

They are not the same.

[jujigatame]

At Boxrec Sueno was #46 at Fly and Simsri moved to #32 Fly with his win.

Simsri moved down to the much weaker Light Fly and this #32 Fly was equivalent to #21 Light Fly.

This is why they are poor. You have a fighter with 10 fights, most of which are totally meaningless. He beats a fighter you had as 46th best, that puts him 32!!!! Computerrank explains with numbers, common sense would see that the fighter Simsri/Sueno should be ranked outside the top 50. You are playing a dangerous game elevating boxers into a position where they are deemed world level when they are unqualified. If one of these fighters ever dies somebody should be accountable for allowing the fight to happen. Computerrank does not have the boxing knowledge to understand the errors.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a win over #46 making you #32. Whether that's a reasonable outcome depends entirely on the quality of the fighters from #33-45. If these are mostly similar level fighters with little to choose between them then the leap could be totally justifiable. Also number of fights is meaningless and should not be a factor.

That said, I still believe BoxRec does not sufficiently factor in quality of opposition. The Kownacki example being a very good one. He has been heavily rewarded for fighting C-listers.