Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 20 Mar 2019, 11:05
Is it possible for me to find out the exact points of these boxers then instead of it just saying 0?
They are ranked with their exact rating points.
BoxRec
Ratings - please read before commenting - Archived
Page 126 of 180
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 20 Mar 2019, 11:35
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 20 Mar 2019, 12:01
Abraham Montoya's record is padded, but with some recent success in 2018.mexicooo wrote: ↑20 Mar 2019, 11:05 lol shut up frauline!
Abraham Montoya's record more padded than a crazy persons cell....his rank hasn't changed!...hes rated above so many, and hes fought on small hall circuit shows against bums in mexico!
you keep messing with this rankings, and they are still trash!
stick to golf
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 20 Mar 2019, 18:52
Yeah, saw some significant moves. I would've thought that this would have been far more subtle. Still getting my head wrapped around it.
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 21 Mar 2019, 01:50
#teamalexmexicooo wrote: ↑20 Mar 2019, 13:42 no his record is still padded. Beating guys who are 17-5, who themselves have beaten no one, and are technically worse than some journeyman shouldn't give u points. Find me anyone he beat, that ever challenged anyone of note let alone beat them.
crisitian arrazola has fought better competition than any of montoya's opponents. You cant suddenly go on some records that are 50 50 and rate them high like ruddy encarion, and not others.
Abraham montoyas paper trail is laughable.....
Youre just changing ratings because youre looking like youre trying to 'improve them'. Either do them all properly or don't bother.
caccace is another one....beats Ronnie Clarke.....beats no one else, literally journeymen....and is ranked that high. He fought ward and lost....well Mensah fought macado and lost.....look where hes ranked. COME ON NOW!
U should have kept them the way they were, boxrec keeps losing credibility because your ratings change so dramatically and so often.
Re: ratings release 39 activated
Posted: 21 Mar 2019, 19:56
Have the annual ratings been updated to reflect the new ratings algorithm?computerrank wrote: ↑19 Mar 2019, 16:06 All is the same, the formula didn't change in any way, but
the only difference is the self-explaining restriction:, winners against opponents without any win or with last loss against such opponents, get no additional points now.
The effect is stunning.
This will stop the promotional and matchmaking games with worthless point transfers.
Fair play for all competitors.
Re: ratings release 39 activated
Posted: 22 Mar 2019, 02:53
Not yet, will come ...Manrae wrote: ↑21 Mar 2019, 19:56Have the annual ratings been updated to reflect the new ratings algorithm?computerrank wrote: ↑19 Mar 2019, 16:06 All is the same, the formula didn't change in any way, but
the only difference is the self-explaining restriction:, winners against opponents without any win or with last loss against such opponents, get no additional points now.
The effect is stunning.
This will stop the promotional and matchmaking games with worthless point transfers.
Fair play for all competitors.
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 22 Mar 2019, 06:00
Dilmaghani was moved to superfeather, but I moved him back to lightweight. I mean, he didn't make the 130 lb. limit for over 2 years, and since, he weighed in at over 133 lb. in every fight, once even over 135... I mean, 131 or 131.5, OK, but this is a little bit too much. As soon as he makes 130 again, he will be ranked at SFW. 
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 22 Mar 2019, 06:05
Same goes for McCrory, who weighed in over 134 lb. in his last fight and became the BUI National champion of Ireland at lightweight. As he now holds a lightweight belt, we rank him at lightweight, at least for now. I see he has a fight scheduled in 8 weeks, announced at superfeather, so, let's wait and see...
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 22 Mar 2019, 06:09
I mean, even 132 lbs. would probably be OK, but we HAVE to draw the line somewhere... And be it alone for the sake of future opponents' health...
Re: Boxrec Ratings - Read first before commenting on the ratings
Posted: 22 Mar 2019, 08:05
Ok explain me this.
This guy 1-13-0 is ranked 795.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/687321
Me 3-4-0 Im ranked 1400.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/757303
Why??!! I just want to understand.
This guy 1-13-0 is ranked 795.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/687321
Me 3-4-0 Im ranked 1400.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/757303
Why??!! I just want to understand.
Re: Boxrec Ratings - Read first before commenting on the ratings
Posted: 22 Mar 2019, 09:10
Because the first guy has been fighting better opponents.BenjaminDaCunha wrote: ↑22 Mar 2019, 08:05 Ok explain me this.
This guy 1-13-0 is ranked 795.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/687321
Me 3-4-0 Im ranked 1400.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/757303
Why??!! I just want to understand.
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 22 Mar 2019, 18:52
Boxrec is a great site. No doubt. But I think, that you should consider some points about the ratings.
There is a total of 21856 active boxers. Only 4436 have points. The remaining 17420 boxers have no point. So only about 20 % of the active fighters have points (for women it is about 15 %). Are most professional fighters total bums, that deserve no respect? I think many will see it that way. When I show casual fans boxrec, they also look at the points. And if a fighter has no points, they believe, that he is crap. And some fighters are bums, but 80 %? They may not headline fightcards in Las Vegas, but I don't think, they should be regarded as worthless. And it hurts our sport, when casual fans or casual journalists believe that a fighter is a bum, because the rankings show a 0 points. I work as a journalist, so I know that other journalists do think so. They are used to football (soccer), so the see 0 points as 0 points. And in football that equals "loser". There is no 0.1 or 0.2 in football.
If you compare with tennis, you can see the ATP rankings. The level of the rankings are from 1 (in principle 0) points to around 11000. Boxrec is topped by Saul Alvarez with 183 point. Does that mean, that Novak Djokovic is around 60 times better in his sport than Canelo? No off course not. They have just chosen a level of points, that gives credit to most any win. But only credit compared to the value of the wins.
Number 500 in the world may never have beaten anyone of note. He has 11 points, but that is just the level for a top500 player pointswise. Number 200 in the world has 255 points. The rankings really shows the difference in the respect, you should have for a player in top 200 and top 500. I think it would be fair, that Boxrec did the same. It would give transparency. Transparency gives credibility, and we really need credibility in boxing!
If a user looks at a fighters record, he or she usually wants to be able to see, which of the fighters bouts/wins were the better. But you can't at the most fighters records, because 80% is at 0 points.
Take Tervel Pulev. He is a very skilled fighter winning silver at the European championships as an amateur and bronze at the olympics. These results should of course not count as a pro, but it tells us, that he is not a nobody. He is right now ranked number 5 by the EBU and number 219 at Boxrec in cruiser. He is 12-0, 11 KO's.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/781100
He is at 0 points, even though he beat a solid fighter, Leonardo Damian Bruzzese, in his last fight: http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/555808
Every fight Pulev has had was against fighters with 0 points after these new ratings. Bruzzese is number 248 in cruiser. Pulev is number 219 out of 1172, but both fighters have 0 points. So when you look at Pulevs record, the win against Bruzzese is considered worthless. Was it two bums fighting each other, because they had no points? No. It was a solid fight between a good prospect and a fringe contender in Europe (Bruzzese is ranked 20 in the EU-rankings).
The problem is, that Pulevs when fight against a real bum - Artsiom Charniakevich: http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/667950 - it seems to be as god or as bad as the fight against the fight against Bruzzese. But it is a fight on a totally different level.
If a fighter beats Pulev, the win will be seen as a win against a bum with no results. It is no better than a win against Artsiom Charniakevich, because they both have 0 points. You might say, that it can be seen in the rankings, that Pulev is number 219 and Charniakevich is number 1127. But we can only see that right now. In a month or a year we can't. Whether a fighter was number 219 or 1127 can't be seen on the record of a fighter, we can only see 0 point. And the ability to see the different levels of fighters on a record is a cool feature, that should give the user as much information as possible.
One of the sad things about boxing is the lack of respect for fighters. Some fans even talk about fighters in the bottom of the top10 as bums. But they are not. Those fans are probably just used to see fightcards on tv from HBO, DAZN, Showtime or that level. They probably don't see boxing live. But there are a lot of solid, skilled journeymen, that know their trade, even if they are number 200 or 500 in the world. In welterweight with more than 2000 fighters you can easily find good fighters outside the top1000.
You write: "The level decreased substantially. Especially at the non-substantial lower levels. Parpiev has 0.87 points and Dipaen hat 0.0051 points".
So one fighter has about 170 times more points than the other. But the only one who can see that, is you - the owners of Boxrec. Why not show these points? And why not change the level of points, so it shows respect for the sport and the fighters? I mean, nobody in tennis believes, that number 200 is world class, because he has 255 points. Because it is so low compared to Djokovic who has 10990. But it shows, how much better number 200 is than the player at number 500. Shouldn't number 200 in the world have the same respect in boxing?
I hope you will take this in good spirit, and give it a thought. There is no need for an instant reply. Take your time.
Best regards
Jens S
There is a total of 21856 active boxers. Only 4436 have points. The remaining 17420 boxers have no point. So only about 20 % of the active fighters have points (for women it is about 15 %). Are most professional fighters total bums, that deserve no respect? I think many will see it that way. When I show casual fans boxrec, they also look at the points. And if a fighter has no points, they believe, that he is crap. And some fighters are bums, but 80 %? They may not headline fightcards in Las Vegas, but I don't think, they should be regarded as worthless. And it hurts our sport, when casual fans or casual journalists believe that a fighter is a bum, because the rankings show a 0 points. I work as a journalist, so I know that other journalists do think so. They are used to football (soccer), so the see 0 points as 0 points. And in football that equals "loser". There is no 0.1 or 0.2 in football.
If you compare with tennis, you can see the ATP rankings. The level of the rankings are from 1 (in principle 0) points to around 11000. Boxrec is topped by Saul Alvarez with 183 point. Does that mean, that Novak Djokovic is around 60 times better in his sport than Canelo? No off course not. They have just chosen a level of points, that gives credit to most any win. But only credit compared to the value of the wins.
Number 500 in the world may never have beaten anyone of note. He has 11 points, but that is just the level for a top500 player pointswise. Number 200 in the world has 255 points. The rankings really shows the difference in the respect, you should have for a player in top 200 and top 500. I think it would be fair, that Boxrec did the same. It would give transparency. Transparency gives credibility, and we really need credibility in boxing!
If a user looks at a fighters record, he or she usually wants to be able to see, which of the fighters bouts/wins were the better. But you can't at the most fighters records, because 80% is at 0 points.
Take Tervel Pulev. He is a very skilled fighter winning silver at the European championships as an amateur and bronze at the olympics. These results should of course not count as a pro, but it tells us, that he is not a nobody. He is right now ranked number 5 by the EBU and number 219 at Boxrec in cruiser. He is 12-0, 11 KO's.
http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/781100
He is at 0 points, even though he beat a solid fighter, Leonardo Damian Bruzzese, in his last fight: http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/555808
Every fight Pulev has had was against fighters with 0 points after these new ratings. Bruzzese is number 248 in cruiser. Pulev is number 219 out of 1172, but both fighters have 0 points. So when you look at Pulevs record, the win against Bruzzese is considered worthless. Was it two bums fighting each other, because they had no points? No. It was a solid fight between a good prospect and a fringe contender in Europe (Bruzzese is ranked 20 in the EU-rankings).
The problem is, that Pulevs when fight against a real bum - Artsiom Charniakevich: http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/667950 - it seems to be as god or as bad as the fight against the fight against Bruzzese. But it is a fight on a totally different level.
If a fighter beats Pulev, the win will be seen as a win against a bum with no results. It is no better than a win against Artsiom Charniakevich, because they both have 0 points. You might say, that it can be seen in the rankings, that Pulev is number 219 and Charniakevich is number 1127. But we can only see that right now. In a month or a year we can't. Whether a fighter was number 219 or 1127 can't be seen on the record of a fighter, we can only see 0 point. And the ability to see the different levels of fighters on a record is a cool feature, that should give the user as much information as possible.
One of the sad things about boxing is the lack of respect for fighters. Some fans even talk about fighters in the bottom of the top10 as bums. But they are not. Those fans are probably just used to see fightcards on tv from HBO, DAZN, Showtime or that level. They probably don't see boxing live. But there are a lot of solid, skilled journeymen, that know their trade, even if they are number 200 or 500 in the world. In welterweight with more than 2000 fighters you can easily find good fighters outside the top1000.
You write: "The level decreased substantially. Especially at the non-substantial lower levels. Parpiev has 0.87 points and Dipaen hat 0.0051 points".
So one fighter has about 170 times more points than the other. But the only one who can see that, is you - the owners of Boxrec. Why not show these points? And why not change the level of points, so it shows respect for the sport and the fighters? I mean, nobody in tennis believes, that number 200 is world class, because he has 255 points. Because it is so low compared to Djokovic who has 10990. But it shows, how much better number 200 is than the player at number 500. Shouldn't number 200 in the world have the same respect in boxing?
I hope you will take this in good spirit, and give it a thought. There is no need for an instant reply. Take your time.
Best regards
Jens S
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 15:33
I think its a REALLY bad idea to have pretty much the majority of boxers in the world sitting on zero points. Just cant get my head round the changes.
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 15:40
I agree. There were a lot of drastic moves up and down, with many making little or no sense. I had a handle on the ratings, and now I'm starting from scratch.slapbangwhallop wrote: ↑23 Mar 2019, 15:33 I think its a REALLY bad idea to have pretty much the majority of boxers in the world sitting on zero points. Just cant get my head round the changes.
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 16:11
Just multiply every boxer's points by 10 or 100 for display purposes. I think the additional precision is needed because of recent changes.
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 16:13
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 16:15
Why doesn't it?
If someone has 0.43 points now, they display as 0 now.. Multiply by 10, they'll show as 4. by 100, they'll show as 43.
Doesn't help Mr. 0.00003 but he doesn't deserve anything at that level.
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 16:16
I thought you meant for readers/posters to multiply by 10. You meant the site should do it. My bad.
Re: ratings releae 39 - more visability for lower ratings
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 18:14
The rating points collapsed in the lower regions due to the necessary corrections. I guess, I will make the lower rating regions more transparent.
All boxers start with 0. They have to overcome some steps to be visible.
category 1 displayed with 1 additional point:
- connected to at least one connected opponent with a win or at least a close loss within the last 18 months before and after the current date
category 2 displayed with 2 additional points:
-connected and with at least 1 win against a category 1 boxer
category 3 displayed with 3 additional points: connected and with at least 1 win against a category 2 boxer
category 4 displayed with 4 additional points: connected and with at least 1 win against a category 3 boxer and not recently lost to an opponent of category 3 or less
This will give about 50 percent of all boxers a rating of at least 1 (currently 15 to 20 percent).
All boxers start with 0. They have to overcome some steps to be visible.
category 1 displayed with 1 additional point:
- connected to at least one connected opponent with a win or at least a close loss within the last 18 months before and after the current date
category 2 displayed with 2 additional points:
-connected and with at least 1 win against a category 1 boxer
category 3 displayed with 3 additional points: connected and with at least 1 win against a category 2 boxer
category 4 displayed with 4 additional points: connected and with at least 1 win against a category 3 boxer and not recently lost to an opponent of category 3 or less
This will give about 50 percent of all boxers a rating of at least 1 (currently 15 to 20 percent).
Re: Have the Ratings Changed
Posted: 23 Mar 2019, 18:17
The discussion here should change to thread:
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=28051&p=5123350#p5123350
Better visability for the lower rating regions is in work.
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=28051&p=5123350#p5123350
Better visability for the lower rating regions is in work.
Re: Boxrec Ratings - Read first before commenting on the ratings
Posted: 24 Mar 2019, 12:34
Martin, would it help if we used log function when displaying points, eg ...
SELECT ROUND(r, -2) AS bucket, COUNT(*) AS COUNT FROM humans GROUP BY bucket
SELECT ROUND (log(r) * 100, -1) AS bucket, COUNT(*) AS COUNT FROM humans GROUP BY bucket
SELECT ROUND(r, -2) AS bucket, COUNT(*) AS COUNT FROM humans GROUP BY bucket
SELECT ROUND (log(r) * 100, -1) AS bucket, COUNT(*) AS COUNT FROM humans GROUP BY bucket
Re: Boxrec Ratings - Read first before commenting on the ratings
Posted: 24 Mar 2019, 13:39
Craig Hudson #85 heavyweight. How do you defend that ranking?
Re: Boxrec Ratings - Read first before commenting on the ratings
Posted: 24 Mar 2019, 13:42
Well that certainly clears it all up for me! LOL! (JK)
Re: Boxrec Ratings - Read first before commenting on the ratings
Posted: 24 Mar 2019, 18:13
I will not defend it. There will be a further restriction in the required connectness to proved boxers and he might be down to #515.
Code: Select all
1 1 Heavyweight 659461 Anthony Joshua UK 143.3883 124.3410 1452458931 1442458931
2 2 Heavyweight 468841 Deontay Wilder US 77.0325 68.3948 1422459001 1422459001
3 3 Heavyweight 479205 Tyson Fury UK 61.6580 56.0923 1462459001 1452459001
4 4 Heavyweight 569964 Dillian Whyte UK 55.8942 51.9860 1432459022 1422459022
5 5 Heavyweight 318081 Alexander Povetkin RU 54.1429 49.4762 1432458931 1422458756
6 6 Heavyweight 498837 Jarrell Miller US 49.6025 45.7838 1422458987 1412458987
7 7 Heavyweight 528949 Luis Ortiz CU 46.7159 43.2570 1412459092 1402459092
8 8 Heavyweight 511850 Kubrat Pulev BG 46.4209 42.1643 1412458966 1402458966
9 11 Heavyweight 512994 Adam Kownacki PL 33.7735 26.3020 1422459057 1412458917
10 10 Heavyweight 629462 Dominic Breazeale US 33.6624 27.2175 1392459022 1382458609
11 9 Heavyweight 613846 Joseph Parker NZ 29.9556 29.0825 1402459015 1392459015
12 17 Heavyweight 503964 Oscar Rivas CO 23.5132 18.9069 1382459049 1372459049
13 18 Heavyweight 811429 Joe Joyce UK 22.6185 18.7458 1392459085 1382459001
14 13 Heavyweight 813758 Filip Hrgovic HR 21.7210 21.1833 1372459008 1362459008
15 20 Heavyweight 575332 Agit Kabayel DE 21.1828 18.5351 1362459092 1342458777
16 12 Heavyweight 381739 Dereck Chisora UK 20.7144 21.2673 1382459022 1372458875
17 15 Heavyweight 475159 Christian Hammer DE 19.2841 19.9866 1392459092 1382458924
18 25 Heavyweight 631078 Charles Martin US 18.7255 16.1221 1402459106 1392458917
19 19 Heavyweight 489762 Andy Ruiz Jr US 18.7052 18.6510 1392458854 1382458854
20 14 Heavyweight 451505 Robert Helenius FI 18.2606 20.0207 1392458938 1382458938
21 16 Heavyweight 703923 Sergey Kuzmin RU 18.0823 19.1057 1352459099 1342459099
22 40 Heavyweight 473857 Artur Szpilka PL 17.7045 11.3454 1392458980 1372457684
23 21 Heavyweight 640268 Michael Hunter US 17.4288 18.4213 1392458994 1382458994
24 22 Heavyweight 238766 Johann Duhaupas FR 16.8313 18.1570 1412458784 1402458649
25 24 Heavyweight 643611 Hughie Fury UK 16.6267 17.2066 1362458966 1362458798
26 23 Heavyweight 14883 Tomasz Adamek PL 16.5680 17.7743 1372458945 1372458777
27 26 Heavyweight 489046 Lucas Browne AU 15.9927 15.0362 1422459092 1412459092
* 28 58 Heavyweight 804221 Efe Ajagba NG 15.7021 8.1083 1352459099 1342459022
29 27 Heavyweight 529630 Bryant Jennings US 15.1907 14.7685 1362459049 1352458896
30 37 Heavyweight 355273 Carlos Takam FR 13.9892 11.6159 1372459022 1362458469
31 34 Heavyweight 768670 Evgeny Romanov RU 13.9338 12.9878 1372459084 1372459084
32 36 Heavyweight 212248 Chris Arreola US 13.8382 11.9962 1382459106 1372459001
* 33 78 Heavyweight 651121 Otto Wallin SE 13.8266 6.6178 1352458777 1342458413
34 47 Heavyweight 309799 Mariusz Wach PL 13.4084 10.0167 1372458980 1362458378
35 44 Heavyweight 387871 Eric Molina US 13.3882 10.1642 1382459077 1372458546
36 29 Heavyweight 219370 Andrey Fedosov RU 13.0187 13.6563 1372458952 1362458952
37 31 Heavyweight 79357 Alexander Dimitrenko DE 12.7779 13.5734 1352458896 1352458657
38 28 Heavyweight 280342 Marco Huck DE 12.5581 14.2919 1372458833 1362458833
39 43 Heavyweight 733157 Simon Kean CA 12.3761 10.4147 1312459106 1302458833
40 45 Heavyweight 584916 Trevor Bryan US 12.2893 10.0908 1362458889 1362458650
41 32 Heavyweight 655566 Tom Schwarz DE 12.0632 13.2609 1312459092 1302459092
42 35 Heavyweight 594388 Kyotaro Fujimoto JP 11.4805 12.3895 1342458934 1342458793
43 30 Heavyweight 741417 Petar Milas HR 11.4358 13.5854 1372458945 1372458945
44 33 Heavyweight 763287 Mladen Miljas CA 11.2103 13.1237 1412459092 1412458636
45 56 Heavyweight 621653 Gerald Washington US 10.8898 8.4576 1352459057 1352458056
46 49 Heavyweight 32364 Samuel Peter US 10.4795 9.0780 1402459084 1392455815
47 52 Heavyweight 739980 Nathan Gorman UK 10.2910 8.8000 1312459022 1312458959
48 42 Heavyweight 713216 Tyrone Spong NL 10.2008 10.4589 1312459021 1302459021
49 39 Heavyweight 787430 Daniel Dubois UK 10.1574 11.4304 1332459098 1332458945
50 46 Heavyweight 574621 Dillon Carman CA 9.7463 10.0375 1342459084 1342458945
51 61 Heavyweight 727779 Oleksandr Teslenko CA 9.2900 7.8195 1312459001 1302458805
52 68 Heavyweight 324806 Bermane Stiverne US 9.2591 7.1314 1362459085 1362457888
53 38 Heavyweight 545749 Erkan Teper DE 9.2359 11.4441 1362458938 1352458598
54 63 Heavyweight 327656 Joey Abell US 9.1881 7.5469 1362458777 1362458553
55 48 Heavyweight 716569 Jermaine Franklin US 8.9451 9.5784 1312458860 1302458860
56 41 Heavyweight 630710 David Allen UK 8.8793 11.1825 1312458980 1302458980
57 53 Heavyweight 775950 Ali Eren Demirezen TR 8.4052 8.7295 1382458938 1372458938
58 77 Heavyweight 760653 Kristian Prenga AL 7.6476 6.6722 1312459015 1302458749
59 59 Heavyweight 481634 Adam Braidwood CA 7.2124 8.0782 1302458833 1292458784
* 60 141 Heavyweight 664288 Adrian Granat SE 6.8263 4.1179 1342458777 1332458224
61 54 Heavyweight 512687 Joey Dawejko US 6.8254 8.7061 1332459099 1322459099
62 50 Heavyweight 314868 Alexander Ustinov RU 6.5217 8.9526 1372458994 1362458630
* 63 333 Heavyweight 692149 Zhilei Zhang CN 6.2616 2.9652 1342458937 1332458322
* 64 173 Heavyweight 23704 Amir Mansour US 6.1867 3.4769 1332459099 1322458377
65 51 Heavyweight 483755 David Price UK 6.0865 8.8213 1342459022 1332459022
66 55 Heavyweight 682283 Alexander Frank DE 5.9245 8.6779 1302459008 1302459008
67 65 Heavyweight 734408 Lukasz Rozanski PL 5.9129 7.5401 1352458980 1342458707
68 80 Heavyweight 396836 Tshibuabua Kalonga CD 5.7753 6.5132 1322458959 1312458959
69 57 Heavyweight 426451 Edmund Gerber DE 5.6812 8.4557 1372458813 1362458735
70 64 Heavyweight 814335 Frank Sanchez Faure CU 5.6679 7.5444 1302459042 1292459042
71 90 Heavyweight 795843 Tony Yoka FR 5.6081 5.8404 1302458840 1292458840
* 72 334 Heavyweight 188315 BJ Flores US 5.3800 2.8009 1352458889 1342457776
73 130 Heavyweight 261205 Alex Leapai AU 5.1931 4.3041 1352458882 1352457167
74 93 Heavyweight 646375 Ytalo Perea EC 5.1850 5.6981 1282459021 1282459021
75 84 Heavyweight 718566 Niall Kennedy IE 5.1573 6.3474 1302459106 1302458959
* 76 163 Heavyweight 497435 Mario Daser DE 5.1324 3.7659 1362458805 1352458237
77 107 Heavyweight 817769 Arslanbek Makhmudov RU 5.0632 4.9242 1302459106 1292458994
78 72 Heavyweight 834487 Bakhodir Jalolov UZ 5.0597 6.8698 1302459105 1292459008
79 120 Heavyweight 651723 Evgenios Lazaridis GR 4.9319 4.4557 1292459092 1282458826
80 60 Heavyweight 325134 Sam Sexton UK 4.9311 8.0385 1352458798 1352458580
81 89 Heavyweight 813592 Ivan Dychko KZ 4.8813 5.9533 1342458853 1332458748
* 82 337 Heavyweight 374937 Andriy Rudenko UA 4.8189 2.2862 1342459092 1332458294
* 83 168 Heavyweight 352748 Victor Emilio Ramirez AR 4.8125 3.6198 1342459071 1342457845
84 81 Heavyweight 632393 Robert Alfonso CU 4.7429 6.5108 1352459077 1352458931
85 62 Heavyweight 698932 George Arias DO 4.5741 7.6799 1312459092 1302459092
* 86 515 Heavyweight 625234 Craig Hudson CA 4.5136 0.0128 1292458917 1282456823
87 118 Heavyweight 698269 Kamil Sokolowski UK 4.3889 4.5114 1282459092 1272459092
88 99 Heavyweight 550312 Izuagbe Ugonoh PL 4.3680 5.2844 1292458811 1282458811
* 89 335 Heavyweight 489720 Carlos Negron PR 4.3369 2.6000 1302459022 1292456291
90 0 Heavyweight 492977 Chris Cruz US 4.2375 0.0055 1292458882 1290000000
91 87 Heavyweight 343636 Travis Kauffman US 4.2129 6.1484 1292459001 1292458827
92 162 Heavyweight 679276 Jonathan Rice US 4.1916 3.7707 1292459057 1282458938
* 93 414 Heavyweight 616873 Gregory Corbin US 4.0029 0.5679 1322459106 1312458329
94 151 Heavyweight 816268 Kem Ljungquist DK 3.8931 4.0277 1292459050 1292459050
95 71 Heavyweight 696821 Leandro Daniel Robutti AR 3.8053 6.8792 1302459000 1292458825
96 114 Heavyweight 702784 Demsey McKean AU 3.7908 4.7670 1302459106 1292458580
97 73 Heavyweight 173416 Kevin Johnson US 3.7719 6.8281 1312459022 1312458588
98 86 Heavyweight 510397 Arnold Gjergjaj CH 3.7480 6.2418 1302459015 1302459015
* 99 332 Heavyweight 15726 Dominick Guinn US 3.7461 2.9991 1312459064 1302456634
* 100 408 Heavyweight 673904 Jean Pierre Augustin US 3.7327 0.7177 1292459106 1282458448