Ratings - please read before commenting

computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

margaret thatcher wrote: 27 Sep 2023, 19:44 mw aint the strongest division at the moment, but how the hell is this guy rated #15

https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/793452
The SD against #28 Light Middleweight Jorge Garcia Perez made him #15 Middleweight.
dawudboxer
Welterweight
Posts: 166
Joined: 01 Feb 2014, 05:33

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by dawudboxer »

Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???
computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

dawudboxer wrote: 07 Oct 2023, 13:34 Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???
Because he defeated #2 :D
margaret thatcher
Bantamweight
Posts: 34915
Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by margaret thatcher »

boxrec loves some chris eubank jr, not his first time at #1 :yay:
SportsRatings
Super Middleweight
Posts: 589
Joined: 26 May 2010, 23:15

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by SportsRatings »

Are the undercard fights on Fury-Ngannou going to count in the ratings? I assume that Fury-Ngannou won't since it isn't listed. Who makes the call on this?
John
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 8181
Joined: 28 Dec 2001, 20:00

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by John »

SportsRatings wrote: 13 Oct 2023, 01:17 Are the undercard fights on Fury-Ngannou going to count in the ratings? I assume that Fury-Ngannou won't since it isn't listed. Who makes the call on this?
Dubai commission who normally supervise there told us they think the event is unsanctioned.
dawudboxer
Welterweight
Posts: 166
Joined: 01 Feb 2014, 05:33

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by dawudboxer »

computerrank wrote: 07 Oct 2023, 14:51
dawudboxer wrote: 07 Oct 2023, 13:34 Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???
Because he defeated #2 :D
And how is Liam Smith number two? Canelo is number one, there are many others better than Smith.
computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

dawudboxer wrote: 22 Oct 2023, 07:55
computerrank wrote: 07 Oct 2023, 14:51
dawudboxer wrote: 07 Oct 2023, 13:34 Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???
Because he defeated #2 :D
And how is Liam Smith number two? Canelo is number one, there are many others better than Smith.
You think many others are better than Smith - BoxRec ratings evaluation of the bouts does not ...

Alvarez is not assigned to Middleweight, but to Super Middleweight.

Smith's defining win is against Vargas valid 15.6 points.
Nursaltanov's defining win is against Takesado valid 8.1 points.
Adames' defining win is against Derevanchenko valid 6.7 points.
Alimkhanyl's definign win is against Gualtierei valid 3.5 points.
Cobwebcat
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 282
Joined: 11 May 2006, 09:57

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by Cobwebcat »

How has Fury slipped to 3rd behind Usyk and Joshua?

Also Wilder and Otiz not appearing due to inactivity I presume? If the cut off is 12 months I think that’s too short a period for fighters to be unranked.
computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

Cobwebcat wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 11:36 How has Fury slipped to 3rd behind Usyk and Joshua?

Also Wilder and Otiz not appearing due to inactivity I presume? If the cut off is 12 months I think that’s too short a period for fighters to be unranked.
The inactivity limit is again 12 months as it was before COVID-19.
Cobwebcat
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 282
Joined: 11 May 2006, 09:57

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by Cobwebcat »

computerrank wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 13:27
Cobwebcat wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 11:36 How has Fury slipped to 3rd behind Usyk and Joshua?

Also Wilder and Otiz not appearing due to inactivity I presume? If the cut off is 12 months I think that’s too short a period for fighters to be unranked.
The inactivity limit is again 12 months as it was before COVID-19.
How does that explain Fury dropping to 3 though?
computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

Cobwebcat wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 13:31
computerrank wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 13:27
Cobwebcat wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 11:36 How has Fury slipped to 3rd behind Usyk and Joshua?

Also Wilder and Otiz not appearing due to inactivity I presume? If the cut off is 12 months I think that’s too short a period for fighters to be unranked.
The inactivity limit is again 12 months as it was before COVID-19.
How does that explain Fury dropping to 3 though?
Fury's rating is defined by his best win against Wilder. But it is 24 months ago now. It once was worth 40.5 points, but now only 16.6 points. Whyte win is worth 14.3 points. Chisora win only 8 points.

Usyk's best against Joshua is worth 30.3 points.
Joshua's best performance, his close loss against Usyk is worth 20.7 points.
Cobwebcat
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 282
Joined: 11 May 2006, 09:57

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by Cobwebcat »

computerrank wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 14:09
Cobwebcat wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 13:31
computerrank wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 13:27 The inactivity limit is again 12 months as it was before COVID-19.
How does that explain Fury dropping to 3 though?
Fury's rating is defined by his best win against Wilder. But it is 24 months ago now. It once was worth 40.5 points, but now only 16.6 points. Whyte win is worth 14.3 points. Chisora win only 8 points.

Usyk's best against Joshua is worth 30.3 points.
Joshua's best performance, his close loss against Usyk is worth 20.7 points.
Fair enough. Is the time time decay of Fury’s 40.5 points part of the standard Whole History algorithm or is it something that has been bolted on? If it’s the latter does that decision improve predictability?
851610
Flyweight
Posts: 1
Joined: 07 Mar 2022, 18:45

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by 851610 »

Is it a joke? Beterbiev #33 p4p :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

851610 wrote: 24 Oct 2023, 02:12 Is it a joke? Beterbiev #33 p4p :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Heavyweight, Cruiserweight, Light Heavyweight and Middleweight are missing good competition. Just compare how many 5-star boxers you find in the various weight divisions ...
computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

Cobwebcat wrote: 23 Oct 2023, 18:29 ...
Fair enough. Is the time time decay of Fury’s 40.5 points part of the standard Whole History algorithm or is it something that has been bolted on? If it’s the latter does that decision improve predictability?
Inactive time, winner above loser rule, ratings cap by best performance within a recent time period with decaying value of performances are BoxRec additions to the generalized Whole History algorithm - indroduced independent of the predictability optimisation of the Whole History algorithm.

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

The generalized Whole History algorithm would have; Fury 66.47, Usyk 32,46 and Joshua 27.25.
Donnymac
Bantamweight
Posts: 1
Joined: 26 Mar 2020, 14:48

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by Donnymac »

Question regarding Rating
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/660104
On the whatif Feature before the fight happened (Vs. Abraham Ramirez)if Wagner won he would go to #16. He won by TKO and he didnt move to #16. Even still if i do the Whatif it says #16.
Can i get a better understanding on why please
thankyou
computerrank
Editor
Editor
Posts: 2369
Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by computerrank »

Donnymac wrote: 24 Oct 2023, 07:53 Question regarding Rating
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/660104
On the whatif Feature before the fight happened (Vs. Abraham Ramirez)if Wagner won he would go to #16. He won by TKO and he didnt move to #16. Even still if i do the Whatif it says #16.
Can i get a better understanding on why please
thankyou
Sorry, whatif Wagner vs Ramirez shows #29 as best outcome for Wagner, who is now #29 after his win against Ramirez.

And I additionally tested it with this win eliminated, and I get the same whatif: Wagner is #29 and is #29 after a best win against Ramirez.


SportsRatings
Super Middleweight
Posts: 589
Joined: 26 May 2010, 23:15

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by SportsRatings »

John wrote: 13 Oct 2023, 03:23
SportsRatings wrote: 13 Oct 2023, 01:17 Are the undercard fights on Fury-Ngannou going to count in the ratings? I assume that Fury-Ngannou won't since it isn't listed. Who makes the call on this?
Dubai commission who normally supervise there told us they think the event is unsanctioned.
Have they changed their mind since the BBBofC sanctioned it ?
pelhwan
Lightweight
Posts: 6
Joined: 05 Mar 2016, 09:17

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by pelhwan »

#15 HW Joseph Parker vs #34 HW Simon Kean - 3 star fight
#12 HW Martin Bakole vs #19 HW Carlos Takam - 2 star fight

Shouldn't the bout rating be the other way around according to the rankings?
JCS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5957
Joined: 17 Dec 2004, 13:27

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by JCS »

Will be interesting to see where Ngannou is ranked tomorrow....
SportsRatings
Super Middleweight
Posts: 589
Joined: 26 May 2010, 23:15

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by SportsRatings »

JCS wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:33 Will be interesting to see where Ngannou is ranked tomorrow....
and Fury, too after barely beating a novice in the system!

I don't know how WHR handles that
JCS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5957
Joined: 17 Dec 2004, 13:27

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by JCS »

SportsRatings wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:47
JCS wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:33 Will be interesting to see where Ngannou is ranked tomorrow....
and Fury, too after barely beating a novice in the system!

I don't know how WHR handles that
I'd expect Fury to shift very little... after all, Ngannou is the unknown debutant. Fury's rating is a very proven one -- even though he looked like total crap... Ngannou has no history at all..
SportsRatings
Super Middleweight
Posts: 589
Joined: 26 May 2010, 23:15

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by SportsRatings »

JCS wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:49
SportsRatings wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:47
JCS wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:33 Will be interesting to see where Ngannou is ranked tomorrow....
and Fury, too after barely beating a novice in the system!

I don't know how WHR handles that
I'd expect Fury to shift very little... after all, Ngannou is the unknown debutant. Fury's rating is a very proven one -- even though he looked like total crap... Ngannou has no history at all..
I think Fury looked about like he usually does—sloppy but gets the job done. Against Ngannou he just found a guy he couldn't bully around the ring.

I'm more shocked at how good Ngannou's defense and actual boxing was. I thought he'd be a punching bag after a while but he kept his defense up and didn't gas.

But yeah Ngannou will have to be rated compared to Fury, in some systems though Fury might be penalized. In ELO, what would happen to Carlsen if he almost lost to a guy who never played chess before? (maybe nothing, apparently you can't really lose significant rank even from a draw in ELO)
JCS
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5957
Joined: 17 Dec 2004, 13:27

Re: Ratings - please read before commenting

Post by JCS »

SportsRatings wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 20:41
JCS wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:49
SportsRatings wrote: 28 Oct 2023, 19:47

and Fury, too after barely beating a novice in the system!

I don't know how WHR handles that
I'd expect Fury to shift very little... after all, Ngannou is the unknown debutant. Fury's rating is a very proven one -- even though he looked like total crap... Ngannou has no history at all..
I think Fury looked about like he usually does—sloppy but gets the job done. Against Ngannou he just found a guy he couldn't bully around the ring.

I'm more shocked at how good Ngannou's defense and actual boxing was. I thought he'd be a punching bag after a while but he kept his defense up and didn't gas.

But yeah Ngannou will have to be rated compared to Fury, in some systems though Fury might be penalized. In ELO, what would happen to Carlsen if he almost lost to a guy who never played chess before? (maybe nothing, apparently you can't really lose significant rank even from a draw in ELO)
I thought Fury was very inaccurate with his punching... and timid, but perhaps he felt the power.

Also surprised by Ngannou's tank. Wonder if there was drug testing??

The K-factor is pretty low in chess... so Magnus would not lose much.
Post Reply