Ratings - please read before commenting

[J0E_90]

Question that pertains to amateur boxing rankings

Is there any additional weighting given to RSC/RSCH/RSCO/RSCOS/RSCI/RSCM/RET wins?

Anecdotally there would not appear to be. These are essentially TKO wins just recorded under these terms as that is the terminology of amateur boxing.

RSC - Referee stopped contest (this is the term used currently)
RSCH - Referee stopped contest due to headshots (defunct term)
RSCO/RSCOS - Referee stopped contest due to outclassing (defunct term)
RET - Corner retirement
RSCI - Referee stopped contest due to Injury
RSCM - Referee stopped contest due to Medical Reasons

Some associations/results sheets do list TKOs and I'm wondering is that leading to some disparity in rankings.

Can RSC, RSCH, RSCO, RSCOS, RSCI, RSCM, and RET be aligned to TKO in terms of points?

Thank you

[computerrank]

Question that pertains to amateur boxing rankings

Is there any additional weighting given to RSC/RSCH/RSCO/RSCOS/RSCI/RSCM/RET wins?

Anecdotally there would not appear to be. These are essentially TKO wins just recorded under these terms as that is the terminology of amateur boxing.

RSC - Referee stopped contest (this is the term used currently)
RSCH - Referee stopped contest due to headshots (defunct term)
RSCO/RSCOS - Referee stopped contest due to outclassing (defunct term)
RET - Corner retirement
RSCI - Referee stopped contest due to Injury
RSCM - Referee stopped contest due to Medical Reasons

Some associations/results sheets do list TKOs and I'm wondering is that leading to some disparity in rankings.

Can RSC, RSCH, RSCO, RSCOS, RSCI, RSCM, and RET be aligned to TKO in terms of points?

Thank you

"KO","TKO","RTD","DQ","RSC","RSCO","RSCOS","RSCH","RSCM","RSCI","RET" are treated the same.
numbers of bouts currently:
RSCO 2147
RSCI 1835
RSSC 18579
RSCH 864
RET 1680
RSCOS 141
RSCM 9

[J0E_90]

Question that pertains to amateur boxing rankings

Is there any additional weighting given to RSC/RSCH/RSCO/RSCOS/RSCI/RSCM/RET wins?

Anecdotally there would not appear to be. These are essentially TKO wins just recorded under these terms as that is the terminology of amateur boxing.

RSC - Referee stopped contest (this is the term used currently)
RSCH - Referee stopped contest due to headshots (defunct term)
RSCO/RSCOS - Referee stopped contest due to outclassing (defunct term)
RET - Corner retirement
RSCI - Referee stopped contest due to Injury
RSCM - Referee stopped contest due to Medical Reasons

Some associations/results sheets do list TKOs and I'm wondering is that leading to some disparity in rankings.

Can RSC, RSCH, RSCO, RSCOS, RSCI, RSCM, and RET be aligned to TKO in terms of points?

Thank you

"KO","TKO","RTD","DQ","RSC","RSCO","RSCOS","RSCH","RSCM","RSCI","RET" are treated the same.
numbers of bouts currently:
RSCO 2147
RSCI 1835
RSSC 18579
RSCH 864
RET 1680
RSCOS 141
RSCM 9

Apologies, my mistake. Was only going off anecdotal evidence. Thank you for your reply.

Further to this, and this would be a question for John or Marina, is it be possible for an amendment to the code that will make all of these results show as stoppages in a boxer's overall W-D-L record?

[computerrank]

Question that pertains to amateur boxing rankings

Is there any additional weighting given to RSC/RSCH/RSCO/RSCOS/RSCI/RSCM/RET wins?

Anecdotally there would not appear to be. These are essentially TKO wins just recorded under these terms as that is the terminology of amateur boxing.

RSC - Referee stopped contest (this is the term used currently)
RSCH - Referee stopped contest due to headshots (defunct term)
RSCO/RSCOS - Referee stopped contest due to outclassing (defunct term)
RET - Corner retirement
RSCI - Referee stopped contest due to Injury
RSCM - Referee stopped contest due to Medical Reasons

Some associations/results sheets do list TKOs and I'm wondering is that leading to some disparity in rankings.

Can RSC, RSCH, RSCO, RSCOS, RSCI, RSCM, and RET be aligned to TKO in terms of points?

Thank you

"KO","TKO","RTD","DQ","RSC","RSCO","RSCOS","RSCH","RSCM","RSCI","RET" are treated the same.
numbers of bouts currently:
RSCO 2147
RSCI 1835
RSSC 18579
RSCH 864
RET 1680
RSCOS 141
RSCM 9

Apologies, my mistake. Was only going off anecdotal evidence. Thank you for your reply.

Further to this, and this would be a question for John or Marina, is it be possible for an amendment to the code that will make all of these results show as stoppages in a boxer's overall W-D-L record?

This thread considers rating algorithm questions. Your issue should be raised in the thread 'SUGGESTIONS FOR BOXREC' , I guess:

viewtopic.php?t=250810

[pugilisticspecialist]

The balance factor between divisons should be based on the % weight difference between divisions.

So if a fighter moves from 168 lbs to 175 lbs, their rating should be reduced to 96% of what it was at 168 lbs, since 168 is 96% of 175.

Obviously the reduction between cruiserweight and heavyweight is difficult to determine, since heavyweight has no max limit, but if there's some way to find the all-time mean average weight at heavyweight, then you could go off that.

Another thing, for the all-time ratings, cruiserweight should be split into two: "cruiserweight 200 lbs" and "cruiserweight 190 lbs".

Also, old school heavyweight fights where both fighters are below 200 lbs should be treated as cruiserweight bouts.

[computerrank]

Is Luis Padilla missing a fight on his record or is this an error?

https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/981417
https://boxrec.com/en/event/867856
Here, he's 16-3-2, having won 3-in-a-row, then losing 3-in-a-row

https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/794770
...Yet, here, he's 15-3-2, having won 2-in-a-row, then losing 3-in-a-row, and a draw

You should not post that here - this thread is for the ratings algorithm

By the way, everything is all right for boxer_id 794770 - he is 16-4-2 on his profile page.

[computerrank]

I completely revised the BoxRec Ratings Description:

https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/BoxRe ... escription

[pugilisticspecialist]

What ratings version are we on now, and what's the prediction ratio?

[computerrank]

What ratings version are we on now, and what's the prediction ratio?

WHR.1.2.5 with winner prediction ratio 85.67 percent went public today,

Main improvements:
- The mean prediction error for the stoppage risk of a bout was reduced from 15.1 % down to 1.6 %
- seeding the initial ratings of boxers in heavier divisions higher than in lighter divisions not needed any more !!!
- internal WHR rating now is absolute fighting strength of boxer

[Khash]

Sometimes it really seems the boxrec computers don't bring all the data into calculations when rating !

Can someone explain how on the p4p list of my country (Iran) this boxer with a record of 1-5-1 has a higher rating
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/1110273

Than this boxer (me) with the record of 7-3
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/862313

How !?

[computerrank]

Sometimes it really seems the boxrec computers don't bring all the data into calculations when rating !

Can someone explain how on the p4p list of my country (Iran) this boxer with a record of 1-5-1 has a higher rating
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/1110273

Than this boxer (me) with the record of 7-3
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/862313

How !?

Iran current p4p
- #2 Bahadur Karami id=1110273 record 1-5-1
- #3 Khashaiar Ghassemi id=862313 record 7-3-0

BoxRec ratings do not go with the raw record, but with the quality of opposition and the achievements in relation to that.

Karami has a potential rating of .184 points and his best performance was a very close loss against Reece Farnhill on 2023-03-04 with .326 points at that point. That gives a current rating of .184.

Ghassemi has a potential rating of .327 and his best performance was a stoppage against Attanon Kunlawong on 2022-07-24 with only 0.058 points at that point. That gives a current rating of .116.

Ghassemi needs to fight better opposition to exempt his potential.

[margaret thatcher]

it's always these dudes with hugely padded records complaining about their ranking isnt it

[Khash]

"Hugely padded record complaining blah.."

Take a look at my record, I fought anything that was available, never had a promoter .
On my debut I fought a guy who had only 3 losses to the likes of Lomachenko and Miguel Berchelt...
I finished the six round fight with him but even then that didn't do much to my rating.

Read and examine the argument I have brought forth carefully before making a comment.

[Khash]

Sometimes it really seems the boxrec computers don't bring all the data into calculations when rating !

Can someone explain how on the p4p list of my country (Iran) this boxer with a record of 1-5-1 has a higher rating
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/1110273

Than this boxer (me) with the record of 7-3
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/862313

How !?

Iran current p4p
- #2 Bahadur Karami id=1110273 record 1-5-1
- #3 Khashaiar Ghassemi id=862313 record 7-3-0

BoxRec ratings do not go with the raw record, but with the quality of opposition and the achievements in relation to that.

Karami has a potential rating of .184 points and his best performance was a very close loss against Reece Farnhill on 2023-03-04 with .326 points at that point. That gives a current rating of .184.

Ghassemi has a potential rating of .327 and his best performance was a stoppage against Attanon Kunlawong on 2022-07-24 with only 0.058 points at that point. That gives a current rating of .116.

Ghassemi needs to fight better opposition to exempt his potential.

I appreciate your prompt reply and explanation,

Don't you think the lack of full info updated on jy record such as the weight of me and my opponent at the time of the fight has caused the decrease of the ratings to some extent?

[computerrank]

... I appreciate your prompt reply and explanation,

Don't you think the lack of full info updated on jy record such as the weight of me and my opponent at the time of the fight has caused the decrease of the ratings to some extent?

... no influence ...

correction:

The loss of Karami against low rated Alexandre Branson Cole drops him as he is tied to that winner by the winner above loser rule - and so he is rated lower than Cole for 18 months.

[jujigatame]

Am I crazy or did Seigo Yuri Akui recently appear at #2 at 112? Is this somehow related to the fact that he beat Yabuki back in 2018, and then Yabuki went on to beat Teraji at 108 last year?

[computerrank]

Am I crazy or did Seigo Yuri Akui recently appear at #2 at 112? Is this somehow related to the fact that he beat Yabuki back in 2018, and then Yabuki went on to beat Teraji at 108 last year?

Seigo Yuri Akui TKOed Taku Kuwahara on 2021-07-21.

[jujigatame]

Hmm I guess I wouldn't have thought that fight would have so much effect, but these Japanese domestic bouts are often fought at a pretty high level so maybe I should adjust my expectations.

[extrahen]

Put the heavyweights ratings back to what they were, how can you have Usyk down at 27 p4p and ratings-wise suggest there is barely any top heavyweights.

[computerrank]

Put the heavyweights ratings back to what they were, how can you have Usyk down at 27 p4p and ratings-wise suggest there is barely any top heavyweights.

There is a lack of competition in higher weight divisions - and the p4p ratings represent that now ...

[gregregegg]

Put the heavyweights ratings back to what they were, how can you have Usyk down at 27 p4p and ratings-wise suggest there is barely any top heavyweights.

There is a lack of competition in higher weight divisions - and the p4p ratings represent that now ...

While I kind of understand the less competitors aspect, usyk at 27 is laughable. I know it’s impossible to make the perfect algorithm but Liam smith being 15 spots higher…. As well as ugas, kambo, donnair all above usyk…

There is not a single fan/expert/human on earth with those guys above usyk p4p…

I think this “correction” while logical in an algorithmic sense has kinda made P4P rankings a wrong, and underrated heavyweight fights in general (Joyce vs zhang being 2 star for example)…

[Ernestogon]

What is a "connected fighter" in the context of the algorithm?

[computerrank]

What is a "connected fighter" in the context of the algorithm?

I will add that to the ratings description ...

[pugilisticspecialist]

Put the heavyweights ratings back to what they were, how can you have Usyk down at 27 p4p and ratings-wise suggest there is barely any top heavyweights.

They shouldn't just bend the algorithm to confirm preconceived biases.

One of the great things about BoxRec is it exposes a lot of narratives journalists and fans have about boxing history as inaccurate.

[Manrae]

https://boxrec.com/en/ratings?sex=M&div ... t&offset=0

Why is Kambosos ranked higher than Devin Haney???