Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived

[margaret thatcher]

Jack Johnson & Sam Langford are way too low... changes must be made...

Langford never got a title shot, he was blacklisted and avoided, so he never got a chance to earn the points he missed out on. So I can understand that statistically.

But Papa Jack...looking at his record, BoxRec says, not only was he never in a 5-star fight, he was never in a 4-star fight! Even though he won 6 world heavyweight title bouts! Back when there was only 1 world champion at a time. That's just crazy. Show me the boxing historian who thinks there were 172 better heavyweight fighters.

Ya, loved his HW title win vs 5'7 160s pound Tommy Burns, came off the deck spectacularly to beat middleweight banger Stan Ketchel too didn't he

[Manrae]

Jack Johnson and Sam Langford were the best at their time. But nobody can say they were better or worse than modern boxers. The match-ups and the result findings were very different at that times. Both boxers are in the line of top Heavyweights, but their competition was not comparable with modern times. Jack Dempsey and then Gene Tunney were the first to reach modern level.

Then the rankings need to reflect that... it's blatant disrespect at this point. Not one person on this board would suggest Jack Dempsey should be where Sam and Jack are and he openly redrew the color line and refused to face black fighters as champion.

I'm not criticizing the process. I get it. Some fighters were & are awarded a lot more opportunities than others resulting in disproportionate numbers. Boxing is and always has been a political, dirty sport. But the end result on how these numbers are used to create all time rankings must be changed to have a better grasp on reality. I dare anybody to e-mail any boxing historian and explain why Sam & Jack's all time rankings are justified.

[margaret thatcher]

How many black fighters did Jack J defend against?

[Manrae]

How many black fighters did Jack J defend against?

None. It was for economic reasons. He had fought the best black heavyweights in his time and beat them before the championship, but only wanted to make money after gaining the crown, not look out for his people. Same way Floyd fought 2 black fighters in the last 10 years of his career. Dempsey was racist at worst, coward at best concerning defending against Black fighters.
https://www.americanheritage.com/only-contender
Tunney was also a bigot
https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/ ... suhckp3zn1

Seeing as you're named after a racist, I won't be going back-and-forth with you on this issue, moving on...

Computerrank, folks don't want to see GT or JD's status fall because of it? Fine. Many boxing historians place them high, so it's not really something I care about whether I agree with it or not. Their ratings here reflects what most boxing historians would agree with.

You cannot say the same thing about Langford and Johnson. What is the point of all time rankings if they do not reflect historical perspective? Do what you want, it's your platform, but it's not right...

[margaret thatcher]

Ah, None, just like Dempsey

I really know nothing about Marg Thatcher tbh. I had to choose a forum name and something about her was on the news at that moment so i just went with it as it was in my head. Lol you think I'm a racist homeslice?

[jujigatame]

This probably isn't the right place to ask this, but why isn't the Benavidez vs. Angulo card this weekend on the schedule?

[squiggy]

Joe Smith vs Eleider Alvarez: The difference between the bout star rating and the boxers star ratings is a result of the winner always above loser correction.
The boxer star rating is the corrected value and stored in the boxer's career table. The bout star rating is calculated from the uncorrected values of the boxers in the bout table.
Joe Smith's uncorrected value is 65 points (4 star) and the corrected is 95 points (5 star).

Alright, then why is the Joe Smith Jr. vs Eleider Alvarez fight page showing their "after fight" values? That's impressive, seeing how the fight is next month!

All fight pages have only "after fight" ratings and none have "before fight" ratings.

Also, all bouts on fighter pages list the after bout ratings and not the before fight ratings as they used to. It's now impossible at a glance to see who the favourite in a bout was on a fighter's page.

I definitely miss the before fight values being listed.

[computerrank]

Joe Smith vs Eleider Alvarez: The difference between the bout star rating and the boxers star ratings is a result of the winner always above loser correction.
The boxer star rating is the corrected value and stored in the boxer's career table. The bout star rating is calculated from the uncorrected values of the boxers in the bout table.
Joe Smith's uncorrected value is 65 points (4 star) and the corrected is 95 points (5 star).

Alright, then why is the Joe Smith Jr. vs Eleider Alvarez fight page showing their "after fight" values? That's impressive, seeing how the fight is next month!

All fight pages have only "after fight" ratings and none have "before fight" ratings.

Also, all bouts on fighter pages list the after bout ratings and not the before fight ratings as they used to. It's now impossible at a glance to see who the favourite in a bout was on a fighter's page.

I definitely miss the before fight values being listed.

There is no specific before fight value, beside you take the after bout value from the fight before.

[squiggy]

But isn't it often the case that someone's numbers have changed since their last fight, like say they went inactive for a long time or have gone too long fighting poor opposition?

[computerrank]

But isn't it often the case that someone's numbers have changed since their last fight, like say they went inactive for a long time or have gone too long fighting poor opposition?

Fighting poor opposition will reduce the ratings and you can see that in the ratings at bout time. The rating of inactive boxers cannot be calculated. Some hold their rating, some drop. It depends on the next bout's result.

[computerrank]

Saturday's Dillian Whyte vs. Alexander Povetkin is now listed as a "Zero-star" fight.

And also the entire Saturday's Shawn Porter vs. Sebastian Formella card still isn't listed at all.

Dillian Whyte's rating was set to 0 points for this bout. I don't know why? I triggered a new bout update and it set the correct value now???

I don't see a problem with the Porter vs Formella card etc. Here everything looks OK?!

[computerrank]

Dillian Whyte's rating was set to 0 points for this bout. I don't know why? I triggered a new bout update and it set the correct value now???

I don't see a problem with the Porter vs Formella card etc. Here everything looks OK?!

Whyte-Povetkin is 5-stars now, yes.

But Porter-Formella is not showing up on either fighter's page, and the entire card is missing from the scheduled fights page, and hasn't shown up for at least a week or 2, perhaps it never did.

Maybe there is a publishing restriction for the event.

[SportsRatings]

Dillian Whyte's rating was set to 0 points for this bout. I don't know why? I triggered a new bout update and it set the correct value now???

I don't see a problem with the Porter vs Formella card etc. Here everything looks OK?!

Whyte-Povetkin is 5-stars now, yes.

But Porter-Formella is not showing up on either fighter's page, and the entire card is missing from the scheduled fights page, and hasn't shown up for at least a week or 2, perhaps it never did.

Maybe there is a publishing restriction for the event.

What exactly is that? I heard about that before, that BoxRec won't list certain fights from certain promotions that don't want them listed...by why is that? Is it just a "gentleman's agreement" or will the promoters actually sue if Boxrec lists their fights?

And do they really have a legal leg to stand on if they announce a fight and say "you can't list our fights that are happening and we have announced"

[jujigatame]

The Alvarez vs. Joe Smith fight just lost it's star rating. It was 4-stars but now it's not rated. Bug?

[computerrank]

The Alvarez vs. Joe Smith fight just lost it's star rating. It was 4-stars but now it's not rated. Bug?

There wasn't a change in the bout. I have no clue why that happened. I now triggered an update for the bout, and it is OK again. I will have to investigate those issues.

[jujigatame]

FYI the Papin vs. Fayfer result (which should have a decent-sized effect on CW ratings) hasn't been entered into the DB for some reason.

[pugilisticspecialist]

Why has Daniel Dubois fallen from 18th to 20th after a stoppage win?

[computerrank]

Why has Daniel Dubois fallen from 18th to 20th after a stoppage win?

Missing opponent quality.

[mike1989]

This current rating system is bursting at the seams. There are a lot of bugs. Take for example Gennady Golovin's current rating: he grew up in those. battles in which it should fall ????

[computerrank]

This current rating system is bursting at the seams. There are a lot of bugs. Take for example Gennady Golovin's current rating: he grew up in those. battles in which it should fall ????

Golovkin had a close win against Derevyanchenko, who was much lower. And Golovkin had Rolls, which was a mismatch.

[mike1989]

This current rating system is bursting at the seams. There are a lot of bugs. Take for example Gennady Golovin's current rating: he grew up in those. battles in which it should fall ????

Golovkin had a close win against Derevyanchenko, who was much lower. And Golovkin had Rolls, which was a mismatch.

From 2006 to 2014, the head's rating increased from 23.33 points to 1203 points, the best opponent's rating was 68.51 points Curtis Stevens in 2013. The question is why Golovktna's rating has grown ????

[computerrank]

This current rating system is bursting at the seams. There are a lot of bugs. Take for example Gennady Golovin's current rating: he grew up in those. battles in which it should fall ????

Golovkin had a close win against Derevyanchenko, who was much lower. And Golovkin had Rolls, which was a mismatch.

From 2006 to 2014, the head's rating increased from 23.33 points to 1203 points, the best opponent's rating was 68.51 points Curtis Stevens in 2013. The question is why Golovktna's rating has grown ????

But after 2013, between 2016 and 2018 Golovkin defeated and equaled with opponents (Brook, Jacobs, Alvarez) rated between 241 and 2311. This what his career peak.
The ratings before 2016 are influenced and balanced with these top achievements. And the the ratings after 2018 are influenced by the decline in success and opponent quality.

[jujigatame]

Was there a new release recently? I just happened to look at 154 and it seems like Lara dropped a couple of spots, as did Williams and Hurd with Lubin climbing above them.

[computerrank]

Was there a new release recently? I just happened to look at 154 and it seems like Lara dropped a couple of spots, as did Williams and Hurd with Lubin climbing above them.

No new release.
Lara lost points due to his close result against Vendetti.
Lubin lost points. He was before Texeira a month ago.

[jujigatame]

Did Lara losing points make Hurd and Williams lose points as well because now retroactively the Hurd win over Lara doesn't look as good?