BoxRec

candyslim wrote: ↑30 Mar 2019, 03:05 Why is that then? I'm just making the point that achievement has to be the basis of any ratings worth a dime. I mean we might believe that Hrgovic would dismantle Povetkin but that doesn't mean he deserves a higher ranking.

I have already agreed Miller beats Pulev and I wouldn't argue with anyone saying that Miller should rank above Pulev despite Pulev's career achievements being better than Miller's. My only objection is to the proposal that they should switch position based on a winning performance by Pulev. You don't demote fighters for stopping their opponent - especially one who could be described (if you're squinting or at a pinch) as a fringe contender - inside the distance.

candyslim wrote: ↑01 Apr 2019, 03:43 Well i wouldn't personally but these rankings are a consensus based 'project' (for want of a better word).

The forum has spoken and decided Pulev places above Miller. I might not agree but I respect and accept that, so my opinion as I see it, serves only to help decide whether a new result affects what has already been decided by the forum, not to re-open the argument about something that has already been agreed.

I hope that makes sense. It sounds a bit convoluted even to me who wrote it.

Rob3_142 wrote: ↑02 Apr 2019, 06:54 I think the likelihood that when people decide where to rank a fighter, there is a wider scope than the most recent fight to consider.

cs: Well yes but shouldn't that wider scope have been considered previously when agreeing the previous rankings? Unless we are saying we clearly got it wrong last time, then surely the only thing that needs evaluating is what has changed. Let's pretend for the sake of the argument that Dinu wasn't a common opponent for both Miller and Pulev. In that case the only thing to consider (except maybe levels of activity / inactivity) is whether Pulev's victory over Dinu is sufficiently impressive to promote him over Ortiz or so deeply unimpressive as to demote him below Miller.

cs: The forum previously concluded rightly or wrongly that Pulev rates above Miller (subject to changes in circumstances) If there are no changes in circumstances we don't need to argue whether Miller rates above Pulev every time we vote. If government worked the same, revisiting and arguing every time about what they already decided last time, they would never get anywhere it would all be f*cked up ... Oh wait!

Pulev rightly stopped his last opponent, but the manner of his victory (or the level of performance against the level of opposition) and the most recent activity will serve to influence my personal decision making.

cs: Yes this is what I've been banging on about. Now forget the pretending: Dinu was a common opponent so this introduces the question of Miller and Pulev's performance against Dinu relative to each other. That is a change in circumstances that justifies re-evaluating their relative positions, do you see the difference, am I making sense?

candyslim wrote: ↑07 Apr 2019, 09:00 I believe I'm right in saying that the BoxRec Forum rankings only began this year, February was it?

In theory every fighter's record up until that date was taken into consideration, consequently we need concern ourselves only with results since the last update. Updates occur when a fight result is judged by Dagilechia (who came up with the idea of the forum's own rankings) that it could conceivably cause the forum i.e. us, to want to alter the ranking(s) based on that result.

That's how I read it anyway.

I did mention in my last post that we need to be mindful of inactivity which should negatively affect a fighter's ranking but as you said, it's a bit of fun so although it helps to have a bit of structure we don't need to get bogged down with a whole load of rules.

candyslim wrote: ↑07 Apr 2019, 09:00 I believe I'm right in saying that the BoxRec Forum rankings only began this year, February was it?

In theory every fighter's record up until that date was taken into consideration, consequently we need concern ourselves only with results since the last update. Updates occur when a fight result is judged by Dagilechia (who came up with the idea of the forum's own rankings) that it could conceivably cause the forum i.e. us, to want to alter the ranking(s) based on that result.

That's how I read it anyway.

I did mention in my last post that we need to be mindful of inactivity which should negatively affect a fighter's ranking but as you said, it's a bit of fun so although it helps to have a bit of structure we don't need to get bogged down with a whole load of rules.

Deleted_Scenes wrote: ↑18 Apr 2019, 14:36 If Miller's B sample tests positive, will he be dropped from these rankings, with a vote on a replacement? Or are we keeping things in-ring only?

jamamb wrote: ↑18 Apr 2019, 15:01 what wud be the process for voting him back in in the future?

5 of the guys in our ratings have tested positive, not just miller

Deleted_Scenes wrote: ↑18 Apr 2019, 14:36 If Miller's B sample tests positive, will he be dropped from these rankings, with a vote on a replacement? Or are we keeping things in-ring only?

jamamb wrote: ↑18 Apr 2019, 15:01 what wud be the process for voting him back in in the future?

5 of the guys in our ratings have tested positive, not just miller