A lot of the fights were bigger than their placement on the list. Any time someone points out anything to do with Boxrec's ratings all they're doing is pointing out how weak Boxrec's ratings system is.
It's good for figuring out who the people below the Top 40 are. It's garbage for telling you who's the best or what's the most important.
Onetimeonly wrote: β16 Sep 2019, 09:57
Wow, that really shows how poo this year has been.
Yeah, i guess it's one of the worst, if not the worst, in the 2010s. The best LHWs not fighting each other and the injury of Usyk and his move up to HW were one of the main reasons. Also, this year was quite poor in the <Lightweight categories. At least we will still get the Canelo vs Kovalyov and Ruiz vs Joshua 2.
gilgamesh wrote: β16 Sep 2019, 10:17
A lot of the fights were bigger than their placement on the list. Any time someone points out anything to do with Boxrec's ratings all they're doing is pointing out how weak Boxrec's ratings system is.
It's good for figuring out who the people below the Top 40 are. It's garbage for telling you who's the best or what's the most important.
Wilder vs Fury wasn't as big as Horn vs Crawford?
F*ck outta here
These stats aren't perfect of course, they're nothing serious, they're just for fun, maybe someone will find them interesting.
Of course for me Fury vs Wilder was bigger too, but on the paper, Crawford was an undisputed super lightweight champion, he fought for the welter belt vs undefeated guy who won that belt vs Manny Pacquiao (he should have lost but that's how it looks like on paper). While Wilder was considered by a lot of people a paper champ, he only had one decent win on his resume and Fury fought Seferi and Pianeta after almost 3 years of drinking and mental issues and he looked terrible there (vast majority thought that Wilder will easily and quickly knock Fury out).
Onetimeonly wrote: β16 Sep 2019, 09:57
Wow, that really shows how poo this year has been.
Yeah, i guess it's one of the worst, if not the worst, in the 2010s. The best LHWs not fighting each other and the injury of Usyk and his move up to HW were one of the main reasons. Also, this year was quite poor in the <Lightweight categories. At least we will still get the Canelo vs Kovalyov and Ruiz vs Joshua 2.
Nah 2016 was the single worst year I've seen in quite a while in the year of Boxing. It seemed like virtually nothing of note happened in that year.
One of the worst I've seen since following the sport.
But I'm often reminded of a quote by Larry Merchant. "For the biggest Boxing fans there are only Good years, and Better years"
gilgamesh wrote: β16 Sep 2019, 10:17
A lot of the fights were bigger than their placement on the list. Any time someone points out anything to do with Boxrec's ratings all they're doing is pointing out how weak Boxrec's ratings system is.
It's good for figuring out who the people below the Top 40 are. It's garbage for telling you who's the best or what's the most important.
Wilder vs Fury wasn't as big as Horn vs Crawford?
F*ck outta here
The Top 40 is a lot more accurate than 41-80 and it gets poorer and more out of sync as you go down.
gilgamesh wrote: β16 Sep 2019, 10:17
A lot of the fights were bigger than their placement on the list. Any time someone points out anything to do with Boxrec's ratings all they're doing is pointing out how weak Boxrec's ratings system is.
It's good for figuring out who the people below the Top 40 are. It's garbage for telling you who's the best or what's the most important.
Wilder vs Fury wasn't as big as Horn vs Crawford?
F*ck outta here
The Top 40 is a lot more accurate than 41-80 and it gets poorer and more out of sync as you go down.
No other rankings even lists guys below a Top 40 so Boxrec is at least useful to let you know who these guys are and that they are in fact active and involved in the sport, and this is how they're doing and all that.
They don't have good rankings anywhere. Maybe they will one day, but they ain't there yet. Not even close.
Lennox wrote: β16 Sep 2019, 10:56
The Top 40 is a lot more accurate than 41-80 and it gets poorer and more out of sync as you go down.
No other rankings even lists guys below a Top 40 so Boxrec is at least useful to let you know who these guys are and that they are in fact active and involved in the sport, and this is how they're doing and all that.
They don't have good rankings anywhere. Maybe they will one day, but they ain't there yet. Not even close.
No other rankings even lists guys below a Top 40 so Boxrec is at least useful to let you know who these guys are and that they are in fact active and involved in the sport, and this is how they're doing and all that.
They don't have good rankings anywhere. Maybe they will one day, but they ain't there yet. Not even close.
And I've never heard of that site so clearly they're doing a bang up job
Really? That poster has been pushing them here for ages. What I hate is losing fighters from inactivity.
I've never bothered to click the link. Do their rankings actually have merit to you? If so it might be worth looking into, but generally speaking unofficial rankings are only as important as the source they're coming from.
Really? That poster has been pushing them here for ages. What I hate is losing fighters from inactivity.
I've never bothered to click the link. Do their rankings actually have merit to you? If so it might be worth looking into, but generally speaking unofficial rankings are only as important as the source they're coming from.
I don't look at them either. No rankings have merit to me. His are no better than boxrec.
It's a shame some of these so called "big matchups" don't turn out to be very good fights. And it's a shame they don't happen as often as they should. Given all the weight divisions, when it comes to the best fighting the best, it's actually quite rare.