Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived
-
gregregegg
- Lightweight
- Posts: 9142
- Joined: 29 Sep 2017, 04:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Has the star system got a lot harsher? Loma now has zero 5 star wins, Crawfords got non at 135/140 (somhow brook and khan still are but i understand thats a bit of inertia in the rankings.), Parker had 4 5 star wins that are now only 4 stars.
I dont mind it getting harsher, stars are just a nice little guide at a glance, but yea just noticed a lot of peoples records looking worse at a glance and then relised many many 5s had been turned into 4s.
I dont mind it getting harsher, stars are just a nice little guide at a glance, but yea just noticed a lot of peoples records looking worse at a glance and then relised many many 5s had been turned into 4s.
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Looks better, though I'd like to see the rest of the weight classes if you don't mindcomputerrank wrote: ↑02 Jul 2021, 10:34The discussion about Davis' ranking was a catalyst, yes, but not the reason to change anything. The discussion lead me into finding a lot of top boxers with a massive unbalance between WHR rating and best opponent rating in recent time.
So introducing a rating cap would make a good additional rule for the BoxRec ratings, I now think.
Meanwhile I generalized the cap rules a bit:
- look into all bouts in boxers profile - not only the last 3 years
- give all bouts between 3 year ago and 6 years ago a weight of 0.5 (for the last 3 years weight 1)
- give all bouts between 6 year ago and 9 years ago a weight of 0.25 ... etc
That changes the results - and also the Tszyu / Carlo case - see below.
-
jujigatame
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7432
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 21:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
That may be the case but it feels like a fundamental problem that every clear win raises your rating, no matter how big of a mismatch it is. That seems anathema to an effective ranking system. I don't exactly know how this works but from what you've described it sounds like you have to scale the win values by some factor under 1.0 or else you're always going to inflate the rating of bum-crushers.computerrank wrote: ↑02 Jul 2021, 04:49This results in a loss of prediction power. Taking a value of 0.9 for a clear win reduces the winner prediction ratio from 84% to below 80%.jujigatame wrote: ↑01 Jul 2021, 18:24If this is the case then maybe the solution here is to reduce the value of all wins to some degree? If KOs and dominant decisions are valued at 1.0 and fighters with poor opposition get overrated because 1.0 is always greater than the ratio in their point differences (so they are always outperforming the expected result) then maybe the solution is to make the max win value less than 1.0.computerrank wrote: ↑01 Jul 2021, 06:09 Jermell Carlo:
- cap version: pretty easy to understand, his best defeated opponent within last 3 years was only 10% of his rating
- close-rating version: same point, ratios 10% and below, only exception Harrison and that was a loss
The fundamental cause of improving the rating with inferior opponents clearly defeated is that the probability for a 100% win always is lower than 100%. So the winner still will get a bit.
-
gregregegg
- Lightweight
- Posts: 9142
- Joined: 29 Sep 2017, 04:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Crawford vs brook, crawford vs Kahn, AJ vs pov, AJ vs pulev, AJ vs ruiz (both), Wilder vs ortiz (both), jeff horn vs man pac ect are 5 star fights.....
mike tyson vs holifeild, Lennox lewis vs hollifeild, Ali vs fraiser, Ali vs forman, Durran vs lennard II, Haggler vs Duran are 4 star fights....
This absolutly was not the case untill recently. kinda sets alarm bells when crawford vs brook, an unwanted missmatch is somehow a higher star rating than some of the greatest fights of all time....
mike tyson vs holifeild, Lennox lewis vs hollifeild, Ali vs fraiser, Ali vs forman, Durran vs lennard II, Haggler vs Duran are 4 star fights....
This absolutly was not the case untill recently. kinda sets alarm bells when crawford vs brook, an unwanted missmatch is somehow a higher star rating than some of the greatest fights of all time....
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
gregregegg wrote: ↑03 Jul 2021, 01:57 Crawford vs brook, crawford vs Kahn, AJ vs pov, AJ vs pulev, AJ vs ruiz (both), Wilder vs ortiz (both), jeff horn vs man pac ect are 5 star fights.....
mike tyson vs holifeild, Lennox lewis vs hollifeild, Ali vs fraiser, Ali vs forman, Durran vs lennard II, Haggler vs Duran are 4 star fights....
This absolutly was not the case untill recently. kinda sets alarm bells when crawford vs brook, an unwanted missmatch is somehow a higher star rating than some of the greatest fights of all time....
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Yes, the ratings level was decreasing the last days. I am investigating the bug ...gregregegg wrote: ↑03 Jul 2021, 01:57 Crawford vs brook, crawford vs Kahn, AJ vs pov, AJ vs pulev, AJ vs ruiz (both), Wilder vs ortiz (both), jeff horn vs man pac ect are 5 star fights.....
mike tyson vs holifeild, Lennox lewis vs hollifeild, Ali vs fraiser, Ali vs forman, Durran vs lennard II, Haggler vs Duran are 4 star fights....
This absolutly was not the case untill recently. kinda sets alarm bells when crawford vs brook, an unwanted missmatch is somehow a higher star rating than some of the greatest fights of all time....
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Crazy. The latest ratings are utter trash. On what planet was Brook vs Crawford a 5 star fight?gregregegg wrote: ↑03 Jul 2021, 01:57 Crawford vs brook, crawford vs Kahn, AJ vs pov, AJ vs pulev, AJ vs ruiz (both), Wilder vs ortiz (both), jeff horn vs man pac ect are 5 star fights.....
mike tyson vs holifeild, Lennox lewis vs hollifeild, Ali vs fraiser, Ali vs forman, Durran vs lennard II, Haggler vs Duran are 4 star fights....
This absolutly was not the case untill recently. kinda sets alarm bells when crawford vs brook, an unwanted missmatch is somehow a higher star rating than some of the greatest fights of all time....
Julio Cesar Chavez Jr vs Danny Jacobs a 3 star fight? This is the same dude that lost to a 46-year-old Anderson Silva. Kazuto Takesako a 4 star fighter for beating taxi drivers? Jesus
-
jujigatame
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7432
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 21:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Takesako seems like the same issue I've been complaining about for a while now. It is easy for fighters to rack up a lot of ranking points by smashing scrubs.
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
The issue with the ratings level is solved. The ratings are recovering ...Rocky- wrote: ↑03 Jul 2021, 16:48Crazy. The latest ratings are utter trash. On what planet was Brook vs Crawford a 5 star fight?gregregegg wrote: ↑03 Jul 2021, 01:57 Crawford vs brook, crawford vs Kahn, AJ vs pov, AJ vs pulev, AJ vs ruiz (both), Wilder vs ortiz (both), jeff horn vs man pac ect are 5 star fights.....
mike tyson vs holifeild, Lennox lewis vs hollifeild, Ali vs fraiser, Ali vs forman, Durran vs lennard II, Haggler vs Duran are 4 star fights....
This absolutly was not the case untill recently. kinda sets alarm bells when crawford vs brook, an unwanted missmatch is somehow a higher star rating than some of the greatest fights of all time....
Julio Cesar Chavez Jr vs Danny Jacobs a 3 star fight? This is the same dude that lost to a 46-year-old Anderson Silva. Kazuto Takesako a 4 star fighter for beating taxi drivers? Jesus
-
pugilisticspecialist
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 252
- Joined: 19 May 2009, 16:23
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
What ratings version are we on now, and what is the prediction ratio?
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
No change, only more stable. 84.36 percent.pugilisticspecialist wrote: ↑05 Jul 2021, 19:19 What ratings version are we on now, and what is the prediction ratio?
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
I apologize if this has been addressed before:
Why is Povetkin still ranked when he has retired from boxing?
Why is Povetkin still ranked when he has retired from boxing?
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
You can rise that question in the "Current Scene" forum. A boxer is definitely removed from the current ratings after a year without bout (due to COVID19 it is 18 months currently). But before that, he might be kept active by the editors, if they are not convinced, he really would retire.
-
jujigatame
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7432
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 21:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
BTW I see Zurdo is #1 at LHW now. Perhaps another data point indicating that it is too easy to build big point totals without beating top opponents.
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
The new release with rating cap is decided to go live soon. Ramirez will be #4 with that ...jujigatame wrote: ↑12 Jul 2021, 18:20 BTW I see Zurdo is #1 at LHW now. Perhaps another data point indicating that it is too easy to build big point totals without beating top opponents.
-
jujigatame
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7432
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 21:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
I mean that's better than nothing but it feels like it's just papering over an underlying problem.
-
SportsRatings
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 679
- Joined: 26 May 2010, 23:15
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
So you're saying BoxRec needs to install a bidet rather than just using more Charmin?jujigatame wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 18:35 I mean that's better than nothing but it feels like it's just papering over an underlying problem.
-
jujigatame
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7432
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 21:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Yes?SportsRatings wrote: ↑16 Jul 2021, 17:05So you're saying BoxRec needs to install a bidet rather than just using more Charmin?jujigatame wrote: ↑13 Jul 2021, 18:35 I mean that's better than nothing but it feels like it's just papering over an underlying problem.
-
margaret thatcher
- Featherweight
- Posts: 39201
- Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
i think analogy is like
a dude named boxrec is sick with the sh!ts
juji wants dude to take some medication that will stop his sh!ts, instead of just continually wiping. cuz if you wipe you may be clean for a moment, but your upset tummy gonna let loose some more blasts in a minute
a dude named boxrec is sick with the sh!ts
juji wants dude to take some medication that will stop his sh!ts, instead of just continually wiping. cuz if you wipe you may be clean for a moment, but your upset tummy gonna let loose some more blasts in a minute
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Strange... I'd compare it to surgery vs. painkillers... but what do I know.
-
margaret thatcher
- Featherweight
- Posts: 39201
- Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43
-
SportsRatings
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 679
- Joined: 26 May 2010, 23:15
-
jujigatame
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7432
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 21:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Also why is Kavaliauskas ranked at 154? His last fight was at 147 and his next fight is at 147.
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
You should post that in the Record Queries & Updates forum. Maybe he made other plans before.jujigatame wrote: ↑18 Jul 2021, 11:34 Also why is Kavaliauskas ranked at 154? His last fight was at 147 and his next fight is at 147.
I changed that.
-
jujigatame
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7432
- Joined: 30 Oct 2004, 21:08
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
OK if I see something like that again I'll raise it there. Thanks!