Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived

[JCS]

Here's an interesting one Martin...

Have you ever done a year-by-year study of the strength of schedules across boxing? May be a tough one to judge fairly across eras....

Curious how bad 2020 was in comparison to past years... and how 2021 is looking.

[Manrae]

Martin...

As a result of the new rule, I'm curious what the biggest differences are in the all-time ratings?

The new rule shows no impact to the all-time ratings. The new rule only is applied ad hoc for the current ratings. The WHR ratings are not touched.

Does this mean that there's no change in the annual ratings?

[computerrank]

Martin...

As a result of the new rule, I'm curious what the biggest differences are in the all-time ratings?

The new rule shows no impact to the all-time ratings. The new rule only is applied ad hoc for the current ratings. The WHR ratings are not touched.

Does this mean that there's no change in the annual ratings?

There was an other change in Boxrec ratings due to giving less weighting for wins on points over only few rounds. Before a 10 rounds win on points for example had a weighting of 100% and also has now. But a 4 rounds win on points had a weighting of 40% and now only has 16%. Stopped bouts always have a weighting of 100%. As a result most boxers have less points now. That at most changes the lower ratings and for women more than for men.

In March I will update the annual ratings.

[computerrank]

Here's an interesting one Martin...

Have you ever done a year-by-year study of the strength of schedules across boxing? May be a tough one to judge fairly across eras....

Curious how bad 2020 was in comparison to past years... and how 2021 is looking.

It is not really clear, what strength of schedule would mean?

[mike1989]

How does the current rating points change depending on the opposition ??? Let's take Anthony Joshua the period since the fight against Alexander Povetkin ???

You mean the ratings of Joshua after each of his bouts regarding all bouts of all boxers before each of those bouts. The current ratings in that sense are not available for the past. WHR shows the ratings at time of each bout regarding all bouts before and after that bout. And it would consume far to much computer ressources to calculate those ratings daily, with all those daily new and changed results in history.

Yes

Martin, you didn't answer my question, did you?

[computerrank]

You mean the ratings of Joshua after each of his bouts regarding all bouts of all boxers before each of those bouts. The current ratings in that sense are not available for the past. WHR shows the ratings at time of each bout regarding all bouts before and after that bout. And it would consume far to much computer ressources to calculate those ratings daily, with all those daily new and changed results in history.

Yes

Martin, you didn't answer my question, did you?

Michael, I did - The current ratings in that sense are not available for the past. WHR shows the ratings at time of each bout regarding all bouts before and after that bout. And it would consume far to much computer ressources to calculate those ratings daily, with all those daily new and changed results in history.

[Manrae]

The new rule shows no impact to the all-time ratings. The new rule only is applied ad hoc for the current ratings. The WHR ratings are not touched.

Does this mean that there's no change in the annual ratings?

There was an other change in Boxrec ratings due to giving less weighting for wins on points over only few rounds. Before a 10 rounds win on points for example had a weighting of 100% and also has now. But a 4 rounds win on points had a weighting of 40% and now only has 16%. Stopped bouts always have a weighting of 100%. As a result most boxers have less points now. That at most changes the lower ratings and for women more than for men.

In March I will update the annual ratings.

Ok, cool. And I also think that you had it correct when you ranked them in the weight class according to their biggest win of that year.

[mike1989]

Yes

Martin, you didn't answer my question, did you?

Michael, I did - The current ratings in that sense are not available for the past. WHR shows the ratings at time of each bout regarding all bouts before and after that bout. And it would consume far to much computer ressources to calculate those ratings daily, with all those daily new and changed results in history.

Martin says that the current rating system is not a mathematical formula that applies to everyone equally. And the decision of the council which applies the decision to whom to put in what place in the rating ??? At least it looks like this.

[computerrank]

Martin, you didn't answer my question, did you?

Michael, I did - The current ratings in that sense are not available for the past. WHR shows the ratings at time of each bout regarding all bouts before and after that bout. And it would consume far to much computer ressources to calculate those ratings daily, with all those daily new and changed results in history.

Martin says that the current rating system is not a mathematical formula that applies to everyone equally. And the decision of the council which applies the decision to whom to put in what place in the rating ??? At least it looks like this.

It is a mathematical formula - look here, but a bit more than just add and multiply ... it is more complex ...

[mike1989]

Michael, I did - The current ratings in that sense are not available for the past. WHR shows the ratings at time of each bout regarding all bouts before and after that bout. And it would consume far to much computer ressources to calculate those ratings daily, with all those daily new and changed results in history.

Martin says that the current rating system is not a mathematical formula that applies to everyone equally. And the decision of the council which applies the decision to whom to put in what place in the rating ??? At least it looks like this.

It is a mathematical formula - look here, but a bit more than just add and multiply ... it is more complex ...

the mathematical formula must be understandable and applicable to everyone equally, without exception. If this is a mathematical formula then, Martin, give an example? if you can't? This is not a formula, but a policy.

[computerrank]

Martin says that the current rating system is not a mathematical formula that applies to everyone equally. And the decision of the council which applies the decision to whom to put in what place in the rating ??? At least it looks like this.

It is a mathematical formula - look here, but a bit more than just add and multiply ... it is more complex ...

the mathematical formula must be understandable and applicable to everyone equally, without exception. If this is a mathematical formula then, Martin, give an example? if you can't? This is not a formula, but a policy.

That would limit the ratings algorithm to simple maths. Boxrec policy is to apply the most precise algorithm available.

[mike1989]

It is a mathematical formula - look here, but a bit more than just add and multiply ... it is more complex ...

the mathematical formula must be understandable and applicable to everyone equally, without exception. If this is a mathematical formula then, Martin, give an example? if you can't? This is not a formula, but a policy.

That would limit the ratings algorithm to simple maths. Boxrec policy is to apply the most precise algorithm available.

how the algorithm can be considered the most accurate if you cannot explain it with a specific example. I asked you on the example of Anthony Joshua who is now No. 2, and what can we say about No. 50, No. 100, No. 150 ... ???

[computerrank]

You are turning the same cycles again and again ...

[mike1989]

in Joseph Parker, after the fight against Junior Fa, the current point dropped from 85.3 points to 55.93 points, but in the ratings, Joseph Parker's point remained 85.3. why?

[computerrank]

in Joseph Parker, after the fight against Junior Fa, the current point dropped from 85.3 points to 55.93 points, but in the ratings, Joseph Parker's point remained 85.3. why?

Answered on February 17
viewtopic.php?p=5508600#p5508600

[margaret thatcher]

mike is question machine, it's like an interrogation, kinda obsessive

[mike1989]

mike is question machine, it's like an interrogation, kinda obsessive

) ... questions about the case ...

[mike1989]

Martin with all due respect to you, but this is the most incomprehensible, controversial and bad rating for all the releases that I remember on Boxrek. This is my subjective opinion.

[mike1989]

why did the designation disappear with such a symbol * of the fighters who will have battles ????

[computerrank]

why did the designation disappear with such a symbol * of the fighters who will have battles ????

Please, post that here, it is not related to the ratings algorithm:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=94835

[jujigatame]

Has "winner over loser" been done away with? I see Rene Alvarado is now ranked above Roger Gutierrez even though Gutierrez won their recent fight in an upset.

[felinoboxing]

Hi .. Do you know sofifa? There ratings are given to soccer players. I think, it would be good to add search options similar to those that this site has. I would suggest adding the option to search for boxers by year of birth and to classify them in an age range. Can they do it in Boxrec?

It would be great to see the best under-25, under-23, under-20, or the best of those born in a specific year in the world according to an algorithm. They can do it?

[computerrank]

Has "winner over loser" been done away with? I see Rene Alvarado is now ranked above Roger Gutierrez even though Gutierrez won their recent fight in an upset.

A bug within instant updates sometimes ignores the rule. I am chasing it ...

[computerrank]

Hi .. Do you know sofifa? There ratings are given to soccer players. I think, it would be good to add search options similar to those that this site has. I would suggest adding the option to search for boxers by year of birth and to classify them in an age range. Can they do it in Boxrec?

It would be great to see the best under-25, under-23, under-20, or the best of those born in a specific year in the world according to an algorithm. They can do it?

I guess, it would be possible. you should suggest it here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=94835

[squiggy]

Has "winner over loser" been done away with? I see Rene Alvarado is now ranked above Roger Gutierrez even though Gutierrez won their recent fight in an upset.

A bug within instant updates sometimes ignores the rule. I am chasing it ...

Hmm. I thought, poking around, that this wasn't a bug but a feature of the way scores are currently tabulated. Just as a for instance, Vilomar Fernandez's numbers only increase from 2 to 11 for his 1978 win over Alexis Arguello, while the loss only brings Arguello down from 214 to 190. I've noticed quite a few other instances like this, I just name this one because it's the one I've just now seen.