BoxRec

"Dynamite" Daniel Dubois

With a current record of 22-3 (21 KO's). Dubois has competed in 3 Heavyweight Championship bouts with a record of 1-2 in them.

He has 1 Quality win, and it's a Gold Star win (Anthony Joshua)

His score as of now is 126 points

Are you overturning results in fights in which you disagree with the result, such as in Pacquiao-Bradley I and Mayweather-Castillo I?

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 10:39 Are you overturning results in fights in which you disagree with the result, such as in Pacquiao-Bradley I and Mayweather-Castillo I?

In cases where the overwhelming majority disagrees with the result I do, but it would have to be a truly indefensible robbery, not a close call that could've reasonably went either way.

I feel like I've answered this question 8 times already.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:19

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 10:39 Are you overturning results in fights in which you disagree with the result, such as in Pacquiao-Bradley I and Mayweather-Castillo I?

In cases where the overwhelming majority disagrees with the result I do, but it would have to be a truly indefensible robbery, not a close call that could've reasonably went either way.

I feel like I've answered this question 8 times already.

You would need to specify every case in which a decision has been overturned. You can’t just state that Mayweather is not undefeated because you disagree with the decision in the first Castillo fight. That is pretty silly, really. You are just deciding that Pacquiao-Bradley I was a robbery and overturning the result. That seems a bit odd.

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:27

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:19

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 10:39 Are you overturning results in fights in which you disagree with the result, such as in Pacquiao-Bradley I and Mayweather-Castillo I?

In cases where the overwhelming majority disagrees with the result I do, but it would have to be a truly indefensible robbery, not a close call that could've reasonably went either way.

I feel like I've answered this question 8 times already.

You would need to specify every case in which a decision has been overturned. You can’t just state that Mayweather is not undefeated because you disagree with the decision in the first Castillo fight. That is pretty silly, really. You are just deciding that Pacquiao-Bradley I was a robbery and overturning the result. That seems a bit odd.

As of now the only ones in which I've ignored the official decision are Pac vs Bradley 1 and Chavez vs Whitaker. While I strongly disagree with the outcome of Mayweather vs Castillo 1, and can't recognize Mayweather's Championship bonus there, I don't see it as a "loss" for him, I just see it as an indecisive win that isn't worth as much.

I do record Whitaker vs Chavez as a win for Whitaker, because anybody with a brain can see that's what happened there.

I do record Pac vs Bradley 1 as a win for Pacquiao for the same reason. Bradley would still not be deducted points since he wasn't the official loser, but Pacquiao is recorded as the winner in my book because HE WAS the winner.

Those are some of the only bouts I've measured up to this point that I felt were egregious robberies.

Many times what people will call a "robbery" was really just a close call that could've went either way. In cases like that, I just go with the official result.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:37

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:27

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:19

In cases where the overwhelming majority disagrees with the result I do, but it would have to be a truly indefensible robbery, not a close call that could've reasonably went either way.

I feel like I've answered this question 8 times already.

You would need to specify every case in which a decision has been overturned. You can’t just state that Mayweather is not undefeated because you disagree with the decision in the first Castillo fight. That is pretty silly, really. You are just deciding that Pacquiao-Bradley I was a robbery and overturning the result. That seems a bit odd.

As of now the only ones in which I've ignored the official decision are Pac vs Bradley 1 and Chavez vs Whitaker. While I strongly disagree with the outcome of Mayweather vs Castillo 1, and can't recognize Mayweather's Championship bonus there, I don't see it as a "loss" for him, I just see it as an indecisive win that isn't worth as much.

I do record Whitaker vs Chavez as a win for Whitaker, because anybody with a brain can see that's what happened there.

I do record Pac vs Bradley 1 as a win for Pacquiao for the same reason. Bradley would still not be deducted points since he wasn't the official loser, but Pacquiao is recorded as the winner in my book because HE WAS the winner.

Those are some of the only bouts I've measured up to this point that I felt were egregious robberies.

Many times what people will call a "robbery" was really just a close call that could've went either way. In cases like that, I just go with the official result.

I guess that my 114-114 score for PAC-Bradley I means that I don’t have a brain.

It means you're in the minority on that fight, and I think everyone else's opinion overrules yours. If the shoe were on the other foot, and I thought the bout was a Draw, but everyone besides me said that Pac won I would go with the majority opinion when it comes to how I mark it down in my book.

A good example is with Canelo vs GGG 1 and 2. At the time I watched those bouts I thought that GGG won them both, but there is enough of a reasonable doubt, and enough of the rounds have that "could've gone either way" nature to 'em that you really can't put up much of a fuss about the offiicial outcome.

It's kinda rare that you see a truly outrageous decision honestly, it's not rare however for people to use the word "robbery" for any and every close fight.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:48 It means you're in the minority on that fight, and I think everyone else's opinion overrules yours.

A bad decision which I simply don’t understand is Lewis-Holyfield I. *That* was not a good draw decision. At all.

Many which are called robberies are really not though. They were just close fights that went in a direction which one disagrees with.

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:50

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:48 It means you're in the minority on that fight, and I think everyone else's opinion overrules yours.

A bad decision which I simply don’t understand is Lewis-Holyfield I. *That* was not a good draw decision. At all.

Many which are called robberies are really not though. They were just close fights that went in a direction which one disagrees with.

Indeed. I record that bout as a victory for Lewis. I had it 10 rounds to 2 for Lennox Lewis. He was absolutely the undeniable winner of that bout, and there's no argument that could've been made for any other result.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:53

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:50

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:48 It means you're in the minority on that fight, and I think everyone else's opinion overrules yours.

A bad decision which I simply don’t understand is Lewis-Holyfield I. *That* was not a good draw decision. At all.

Many which are called robberies are really not though. They were just close fights that went in a direction which one disagrees with.

Indeed. I record that bout as a victory for Lewis. I had it 10 rounds to 2 for Lennox Lewis. He was absolutely the undeniable winner of that bout, and there's no argument that could've been made for any other result.

A fight like Schulz-Foreman you don’t overturn the result of though, I presume?

A substantial number of people thought/think that Foreman beat Briggs, but that is another controversial decision which I agree with.

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 14:30

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:53

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:50

A bad decision which I simply don’t understand is Lewis-Holyfield I. *That* was not a good draw decision. At all.

Many which are called robberies are really not though. They were just close fights that went in a direction which one disagrees with.

Indeed. I record that bout as a victory for Lewis. I had it 10 rounds to 2 for Lennox Lewis. He was absolutely the undeniable winner of that bout, and there's no argument that could've been made for any other result.

A fight like Schulz-Foreman you don’t overturn the result of though, I presume?

A substantial number of people thought/think that Foreman beat Briggs, but that is another controversial decision which I agree with.

I had Schulz beating Foreman by 115-113, I had Foreman beating Briggs by a narrow margin.

In both cases while I personally would disagree with the official outcome the margin is so thin that I respect the official outcome, and record it as a win for Foreman and Briggs respectively.

The only alteration I'll make in cases like these is I wouldn't deduct points from the "losing" fighter whom I don't truly felt lost, but I don't begrudge the winner the points that his victory would've gotten him.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 14:37

Casablanca wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 14:30

gilgamesh wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 13:53

Indeed. I record that bout as a victory for Lewis. I had it 10 rounds to 2 for Lennox Lewis. He was absolutely the undeniable winner of that bout, and there's no argument that could've been made for any other result.

A fight like Schulz-Foreman you don’t overturn the result of though, I presume?

A substantial number of people thought/think that Foreman beat Briggs, but that is another controversial decision which I agree with.

I had Schulz beating Foreman by 115-113, I had Foreman beating Briggs by a narrow margin.

In both cases while I personally would disagree with the official outcome the margin is so thin that I respect the official outcome, and record it as a win for Foreman and Briggs respectively.

The only alteration I'll make in cases like these is I wouldn't deduct points from the "losing" fighter whom I don't truly felt lost, but I don't begrudge the winner the points that his victory would've gotten him.

I got it.

I had Shulz 116-112 over Foreman the last time that I scored it. I am going to have to find my scorecard on Eye on the Ring for Foreman-Briggs. I know that I had Briggs narrowly. I think that I scored it 115-114 for Briggs.

Michael "Dynamite" Dokes

With a record of 53-6-2 (34 KO's). Dokes competed in 4 Heavyweight Championship bouts with a record of 1-2-1 in them.

He has 2 quality wins (Jimmy Young and Mike Weaver)

His overall score comes to 88 points

Jersey Joe Walcott

With a record of 49-20 (31 KO's). Walcott competed in 8 Heavyweight Championship bouts with a record of 2-6 in them.

He has 13 Quality wins (Joe Baksi, Lee Q. Murray, Curtis Sheppard 2x, Jimmy Bivins, Lee Oma, Joey Maxim 2x, Harold Johnson, Omelio Agramonte, and Ezzard Charles 2x)

He has 3 Gold star wins (Harold Johnson and Ezzard Charles 2x in their 3rd and 4th fights respectively)

His Heavyweight score comes to 113 points, since he had a few bouts early in his career that were Light Heavyweight contests along with a decision defeat he has an additional 2 points from his brief stint in that division. His overall score comes to 115 points

Note: Seeing as how his 1st contest with Joe Louis for the Championship is widely considered to be a bad decision he receives a +5 to his score for that bout as opposed to the -5 that would normally accompany a Split Decision loss.

It's also interesting to note there are some conflicting reports about who he fought and when. In the International Boxing Hall of Fame book they have some of his Losses recorded as Wins, and different names altogether in some cases. So the information may not be entirely accurate, but I did my best with what I had which was 2 pretty well researched sources.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑01 Jan 2026, 17:37 Deontay Wilder with a record of 44-4-1 with 43 KO's. 13 Championship fights with an 11-2 (10 KO's) record in World Title bouts.

He has 5 quality wins

His total score comes to 221 points

Strangely 7 of Deontay Wilder's wins I can't find any video of. Odd for a fighter in the modern era.

With his victory today over Dereck Chisora, an additional 6 points have been added to his ledger, and he now has 6 quality wins which nudges him ever so slightly ahead of Anthony Joshua on my All Time list.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑04 Apr 2026, 18:55

gilgamesh wrote: ↑01 Jan 2026, 17:37 Deontay Wilder with a record of 44-4-1 with 43 KO's. 13 Championship fights with an 11-2 (10 KO's) record in World Title bouts.

He has 5 quality wins

His total score comes to 221 points

Strangely 7 of Deontay Wilder's wins I can't find any video of. Odd for a fighter in the modern era.

With his victory today over Dereck Chisora, an additional 6 points have been added to his ledger, and he now has 6 quality wins which nudges him ever so slightly ahead of Anthony Joshua on my All Time list.

Interesting.

"The Tuaman" David Tua

With a record of 52-5-2 (43 KO's). Tua competed in only 1 Heavyweight Championship bout losing to Lennox Lewis.

He has 5 Quality wins (David Izon, John Ruiz, Hasim Rahman, Oleg Maskaev and Michael Moorer)

His overall score comes to 227 points

A high score for a man who never became Champion, but a deserved score.

Floyd Patterson

With a record of 55-8-1 (40 KO's). He competed in 12 Heavyweight Championship fights with a record of 8-4 in them.

He beat 14 Quality opponents (Jimmy Slade 2x, Willie Troy, Dave Whitlock, Tommy Jackson 2x, Archie Moore, Roy Harris, Brian London, Ingemar Johansson 2x, Eddie Machen, George Chuvalo and Oscar Bonavena)

He has 1 Gold Star victory (Archie Moore)

His score as a Heavyweight comes to 198 points.

His overall score including his Light Heavyweight and Heavyweight career is 287 points

Gil,

When you were scoring Mike Tyson. How did you ranking system score each of his losses?

I've already answered that question to you. I don't remember if it was in this thread, but I've answered it.

So I'll breakdown a different fighters losses.

Larry Holmes' losses break down thusly.

Michael Spinks 1: -10 points (UD loss)
Michael Spinks 2: -5 points (Split Decision loss)
Mike Tyson: -20 points (KO loss)
Evander Holyfield: -10 (UD loss)
Oliver McCall: -10 (UD loss)
Brian Nielsen: -5 (Split Decision loss)

gilgamesh wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 13:35

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 12:11

gilgamesh wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 11:32

A fighter who was once A 5 may be demoted to a 4 when he's well past his prime. A fighter who was once a 4 can be denoted to 3.

You'd have to be well, well past it before I'd consider you to be a lesser man to have beaten though. I don't write a guy off after 1 or 2 losses just automatically.

As an example, how did you score Tyson's losses?

Buster Douglas - L KO 10 (-30 points) due to the fact that it was a particularly embarrassing upset defeat

Evander Holyfield - L TKO 11 (-10 points) due to the fact that it was a great fight, and one of the best of the year Tyson only loses 10 instead of 20

Evander Holyfield - L DQ 3 (-30 points) due to the unusual and particularly embarrassing nature of this defeat it's -30.

Lennox Lewis - L KO 8 (-20 points) A standard KO loss. -20

Danny Williams - L KO 4 (-30 points) An embarrassing KO loss -30

Kevin McBride - L TKO 6 (-30 points) An embarrassing TKO loss -30

And as a Professional courtesy I simply ignored the Jake Paul farce in his Final score.

There ya go. I knew I had answered that before

Tyson Fury with his win over Arslanbek Makhmudov today gets an additional 4 points to his score.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑11 Apr 2026, 14:10

gilgamesh wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 13:35

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑14 Mar 2026, 12:11

As an example, how did you score Tyson's losses?

Buster Douglas - L KO 10 (-30 points) due to the fact that it was a particularly embarrassing upset defeat

Evander Holyfield - L TKO 11 (-10 points) due to the fact that it was a great fight, and one of the best of the year Tyson only loses 10 instead of 20

Evander Holyfield - L DQ 3 (-30 points) due to the unusual and particularly embarrassing nature of this defeat it's -30.

Lennox Lewis - L KO 8 (-20 points) A standard KO loss. -20

Danny Williams - L KO 4 (-30 points) An embarrassing KO loss -30

Kevin McBride - L TKO 6 (-30 points) An embarrassing TKO loss -30

And as a Professional courtesy I simply ignored the Jake Paul farce in his Final score.

There ya go. I knew I had answered that before

I'm getting old and I've had too many concussions to remember shit like that.

I really admire the work you've put into this, so criticizing you isn't easy, BUT, I don't think you can score the same points for McBride and Douglas. That's gotta be a flaw in your system. I'd hate to see how many points SRR will get taken off for his losses past his prime. Battling Siki could end up with a minus score.

Sugar Ray Robinson with the vast amount of wins he has is surely going to make up for his losses so I don't think it'd be an issue for his overall score really. The success far outweighs the losses.

In retrospect I probably shouldn't have added the extra -10 to the losses Mike had against Williams, and McBride, and I'll alter that now.

"Double M" Michael Moorer

With a record of 52-4-1 (40 KO's). Moorer competed in 17 Championship bouts with a record of 15-2 in them.

He has 4 Quality wins (Evander Holyfield, Axel Schulz, Frans Botha and Leslie Stewart). He has 1 Gold star victory (Holyfield)

Fighting as a Heavyweight he established a score of 96 points in that division. When combined with his Light Heavyweight record his overall score comes to 240 points