Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived

[m1kee50]

Can someone tell me what Mayweathers total points gained at 147 is, and same for Cotto?

[computerrank]

Can someone tell me what Mayweathers total points gained at 147 is, and same for Cotto?

What do you mean with "total points gained at 147"?

Both are rated at Welterweight currently.

[m1kee50]

Can someone tell me what Mayweathers total points gained at 147 is, and same for Cotto?

What do you mean with "total points gained at 147"?

Both are rated at Welterweight currently.

I mean, he had a points value when he left 140, and one fight at 154 notwithstanding, has accumulated points by fighting at 147.

I would like to know who according to the system, has done achieved more in a relative sense, Cotto or PBF?

[JCS]

Can someone tell me what Mayweathers total points gained at 147 is, and same for Cotto?

What do you mean with "total points gained at 147"?

Both are rated at Welterweight currently.

I mean, he had a points value when he left 140, and one fight at 154 notwithstanding, has accumulated points by fighting at 147.

I would like to know who according to the system, has done achieved more in a relative sense, Cotto or PBF?

It's not really that cut and dry..

[m1kee50]

What do you mean with "total points gained at 147"?

Both are rated at Welterweight currently.

I mean, he had a points value when he left 140, and one fight at 154 notwithstanding, has accumulated points by fighting at 147.

I would like to know who according to the system, has done achieved more in a relative sense, Cotto or PBF?

It's not really that cut and dry..

oh god, ive asked a silly question again! what was the value after the last fight at 140, i can see the current rating on the site

[computerrank]

At year's end of 2005 Mayweather had 1750 points at Light Welterweight and Cotto had 812 points.

[m1kee50]

At year's end of 2005 Mayweather had 1750 points at Light Welterweight and Cotto had 812 points.

ty, so subtracting that from their current points, is it fair to say that Mayweather has not collected as many points as Cotto, therefore, relative to his previous standing, Cotto has advanced further/achieved more?

[JCS]

At year's end of 2005 Mayweather had 1750 points at Light Welterweight and Cotto had 812 points.

ty, so subtracting that from their current points, is it fair to say that Mayweather has not collected as many points as Cotto, therefore, relative to his previous standing, Cotto has advanced further/achieved more?

Cotto has advanced more than Mayweather, but Mayweather was already at that higher echelon.

Due to this, you can't really determine who has accomplished more in that period of time... you can only say that Cotto has closed the gap.

[m1kee50]

At year's end of 2005 Mayweather had 1750 points at Light Welterweight and Cotto had 812 points.

ty, so subtracting that from their current points, is it fair to say that Mayweather has not collected as many points as Cotto, therefore, relative to his previous standing, Cotto has advanced further/achieved more?

Cotto has advanced more than Mayweather, but Mayweather was already at that higher echelon.

Due to this, you can't really determine who has accomplished more in that period of time... you can only say that Cotto has closed the gap.

but seeing as you gain more points by defeating fighters nearer your level if below you, and further from your level if above you....

doesnt that mean that we can say that Cotto has, by gaining more points than Mayweather, fought a better quality of relative opposition than Mayweather in the same interval?

[JCS]

ty, so subtracting that from their current points, is it fair to say that Mayweather has not collected as many points as Cotto, therefore, relative to his previous standing, Cotto has advanced further/achieved more?

Cotto has advanced more than Mayweather, but Mayweather was already at that higher echelon.

Due to this, you can't really determine who has accomplished more in that period of time... you can only say that Cotto has closed the gap.

but seeing as you gain more points by defeating fighters nearer your level if below you, and further from your level if above you....

doesnt that mean that we can say that Cotto has, by gaining more points than Mayweather, fought a better quality of relative opposition than Mayweather in the same interval?

I suppose you can say that. Then again, we all know the DLH fight should've been a unanimous decision. Furthermore, how many fighters are actually out there, near the same point level as Floyd for him to gain from?

[Asterix]

I suppose you can say that. Then again, we all know the DLH fight should've been a unanimous decision. Furthermore, how many fighters are actually out there, near the same point level as Floyd for him to gain from?

Miguel Angel Cotto, Antonio Margarito, Shane Mosley. They're not near his point level, but they are the nearest challengers.

If he beat Cotto everyone would shut up. Same with Hatton fighting Witter.

[m1kee50]

Cotto has advanced more than Mayweather, but Mayweather was already at that higher echelon.

Due to this, you can't really determine who has accomplished more in that period of time... you can only say that Cotto has closed the gap.

but seeing as you gain more points by defeating fighters nearer your level if below you, and further from your level if above you....

doesnt that mean that we can say that Cotto has, by gaining more points than Mayweather, fought a better quality of relative opposition than Mayweather in the same interval?

I suppose you can say that. Then again, we all know the DLH fight should've been a unanimous decision. Furthermore, how many fighters are actually out there, near the same point level as Floyd for him to gain from?

Cotto, Mosley, Magarito are all above the level of competition that he has faced, they arent at his level, but they are better than he has got.

Im just saying, because I made the claim that Cotto had done more at 140 and 147 than Mayweather, and was just checking

[thismodernlove]

Steve Molitor # 21 pound for pound. Right on the money!

[JCS]

http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hu ... &cat=boxer

Why is Mesi not in the "active" rankings?

I believe he retired and is running for a position in the US Senate.

[Asterix]

PBF vanished from all-time lists....

He's here: http://www.boxrec.com/ratings.php?count ... &SUBMIT=Go

[JCS]

I think there's some issues with the AllTime Ratings

For instance, this guy is #6 at Super Middleweight:
http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hu ... &cat=boxer

[computerrank]

I think there's some issues with the AllTime Ratings

For instance, this guy is #6 at Super Middleweight:
http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hu ... &cat=boxer

... there was a change ... I will look ...

[computerrank]

I fixed the bug - the new release is ready for launch.

[computerrank]

... and launched.

[JCS]

I fixed the bug - the new release is ready for launch.

Moncrief is still ranked #9. It almost seems like he is being credited for his losses.

Can you run a trace of his all-time progression and post it?

[computerrank]

I fixed the bug - the new release is ready for launch.

Moncrief is still ranked #9. It almost seems like he is being credited for his losses.

Can you run a trace of his all-time progression and post it?

Most of his credit comes from his #1 super middleweight ranking in 1980.

I will trace the achievements of the Boxrec all time super middleweight ranks 5 to 15 and publish the result at this place.

[Blue]

I fixed the bug - the new release is ready for launch.

Moncrief is still ranked #9. It almost seems like he is being credited for his losses.

Can you run a trace of his all-time progression and post it?

Most of his credit comes from his #1 super middleweight ranking in 1980.

I will trace the achievements of the Boxrec all time super middleweight ranks 5 to 15 and publish the result at this place.

AFAIK,
The was no Super Middleweight division before 1984.

[computerrank]

Moncrief is still ranked #9. It almost seems like he is being credited for his losses.

Can you run a trace of his all-time progression and post it?

Most of his credit comes from his #1 super middleweight ranking in 1980.

I will trace the achievements of the Boxrec all time super middleweight ranks 5 to 15 and publish the result at this place.

AFAIK,
The was no Super Middleweight division before 1984.

Blue,

this could be a valid factor.

Do you have a valid source for every weight division - I currently go with my interpretation of the BoxRec Wiki:

weight division; first year

$div_name[1]="Minimumweight"; 1990
$div_name[2]="Light Flyweight"; 1980
$div_name[3]="Flyweight";
$div_name[4]="Super Flyweight"; 1980
$div_name[5]="Bantamweight";
$div_name[6]="Super Bantamweight"; 1980
$div_name[7]="Featherweight";
$div_name[8]="Super Featherweight"; 1970
$div_name[9]="Lightweight";
$div_name[10]="Light Welterweight"; 1960
$div_name[11]="Welterweight";
$div_name[12]="Light Middleweight"; 1960
$div_name[13]="Middleweight";
$div_name[14]="Super Middleweight"; 1980
$div_name[15]="Light Heavyweight";
$div_name[16]="Cruiserweight"; 1980
$div_name[17]="Heavyweight";

I would appreciate your perspective.

Thanks and best regards
Martin

[Asterix]

Super Middleweight started in 1984 -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_middleweight

You can view the other weight classes here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxing_weight_classes

[Blue]

Super Middleweight started in 1984 -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_middleweight

You can view the other weight classes here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxing_weight_classes

The 1984 Ring Record Book confirms the above info.