BoxRec

JCS wrote: ↑15 May 2019, 19:19 Right.. but...

As a result, Hopkins (for example) who generated considerable achievements in multiple divisions.. is limited to MW. Rightfully so, but he did a few things at LHW as well... I assume the LHW achievements inflate his MW rating as well.

Plenty of others fit this bill too...

So you would prefer something like this?

http://151.boxrec.com/~martin/ratings_at_test_div.php

computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 04:58 So you would prefer something like this?

http://151.boxrec.com/~martin/ratings_at_test_div.php

Yes, but unfortunately it uncovers other issues... Jimmy Wilde is one.

What does his bout-by-bout division breakdown look like? I have to imagine he has unclassified bouts.. in a method like this, could those bouts be "defaulted" to the boxer's master setting (Flyweight in this case)?

Are you locking out certain divisions before they existed (Such as Minimumweight) and considering them as their equivalent at the time (Flyweight)?

JCS wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 14:33 Yes, but unfortunately it uncovers other issues... Jimmy Wilde is one.

What does his bout-by-bout division breakdown look like? I have to imagine he has unclassified bouts.. in a method like this, could those bouts be "defaulted" to the boxer's master setting (Flyweight in this case)?

Are you locking out certain divisions before they existed (Such as Minimumweight) and considering them as their equivalent at the time (Flyweight)?

<=1988 MIinimumweight -> Light Flyweight ## MinimumweightWBC, WBA, IBF
<=1975 Light Flyweight -> Flyweight ## Light Flyweight WBC, WBA
<=1981 Super Flyweight -> Bantamweight ## Super Flyweight WBC, WBA
<=1977 Super Bantamweigth -> Featherweight ## Super Bantamweight WBC, WBA
<=1963 Super Featherweight -> Lightweight ## Super Featherweight WBC, WBA
<=1962 Light Welteerweight -> Welterweight ## Light Welterweight WBC, WBA
<=1962 Light Middleweight -> Middleweight ## Light Middleweight WBC, WBA
<=1988 Super Middleweight -> Light Heavyweight ## Super Middleweight WBC, WBA, IBF
<=1982 Cruiserweight -> Heavyweight ## Cruiserweight WBC, WBA

computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 14:54 <=1988 MIinimumweight -> Light Flyweight ## MinimumweightWBC, WBA, IBF
<=1975 Light Flyweight -> Flyweight ## Light Flyweight WBC, WBA
<=1981 Super Flyweight -> Bantamweight ## Super Flyweight WBC, WBA
<=1977 Super Bantamweigth -> Featherweight ## Super Bantamweight WBC, WBA
<=1963 Super Featherweight -> Lightweight ## Super Featherweight WBC, WBA
<=1962 Light Welteerweight -> Welterweight ## Light Welterweight WBC, WBA
<=1962 Light Middleweight -> Middleweight ## Light Middleweight WBC, WBA
<=1988 Super Middleweight -> Light Heavyweight ## Super Middleweight WBC, WBA, IBF
<=1982 Cruiserweight -> Heavyweight ## Cruiserweight WBC, WBA

How are Wilde's bouts treated that have no divisional classification? I have to assume there are a few.

JCS wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 14:55 How are Wilde's bouts treated that have no divisional classification? I have to assume there are a few.

If the bout is assigned to a division, it goes with this division.
Otherwise if there are weights, it goes with the weight of the heavier boxer.
Otherwise with the current weight division (traced within the ratings program run) of the boxer in the higher weight division.
Otherwise with the editor assigned weight division of the boxer in the higher weight division.

computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:05 If the bout is assigned to a division, it goes with this division.
Otherwise If there are weights, it goes with the weight of the heavier boxer.
Ohterwise with the current weight division (traced within the ratings program run) of the boxer in the higher weight division.
Otherwise with the editor assigned weight division of the boxer in the higher weight division.

Looks like Wilde got a ton of points at Bantam and Feather he probably shouldn't have.... because of the funky matchups, etc...

JCS wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:08 Looks like Wilde got a ton of points at Bantam and Feather he probably shouldn't have.... because of the funky matchups, etc...

1919 he defeated Lynch at Bantamweight in his best bout this year
1918 he defeated Conn at Featherweight in his best bout this year
1916 he defeated Symonds at Flyweight in his best bout this year - but the program rated it at Bantamweight ???

All other years are Flyweight

computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:28 1919 he defeated Lynch at Bantamweight in his best bout this year
1918 he defeated Conn at Featherweight in his best bout this year
1916 he defeated Symonds at Flyweight in his best bout this year - but the program rated it at Bantamweight ???

All other years are Flyweight

1916 alone probably bumps him up a few notches if fixed..

JCS wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:29 1916 alone probably bumps him up a few notches if fixed..

Would bring him from #14 to #7 in Flyweight restricted perspective.

computerrank wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:34 Would bring him from #14 to #7 in Flyweight restricted perspective.

Pretty significant...

Juan Manuel Marquez #12 at WW... seems strange.

These types of anomalies aside, I in my opinion, think this is a better way to display all-time rankings...

JCS wrote: ↑16 May 2019, 15:40 Pretty significant...

Juan Manuel Marquez #12 at WW... seems strange.

These types of anomalies aside, I in my opinion, think this is a better way to display all-time rankings...

Thanks for your input, Jason - has to be considered.

The system should be entirely based on prediction rate.
I see no strong argument against this.

Why is Richie Hadlow and Ricky Curline,s fight a TKO? It was a KO. Also Richie Hadlow is “active”.
Thanks
K

Kmal037 wrote: ↑19 May 2019, 02:55 Why is Richie Hadlow and Ricky Curline,s fight a TKO? It was a KO. Also Richie Hadlow is “active”.
Thanks
K

Please post this in the Record Queries & Updates Forum here:
viewforum.php?f=1

Were the boxrec annual ratings ever updated to reflect the new ratings?

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/BoxRe ... ht_Annuals

Also, have you ever considered an annual p4p rating page? Would it be difficult to implement?

Off Topic--I still can't get over that Deontay Wilder KO, geezus

Manrae wrote: ↑24 May 2019, 00:24 Were the boxrec annual ratings ever updated to reflect the new ratings?

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/BoxRe ... ht_Annuals

Also, have you ever considered an annual p4p rating page? Would it be difficult to implement?

Off Topic--I still can't get over that Deontay Wilder KO, geezus

annual ratings updated ...

annual p4p wouldn't be difficult, but I doubt it makes sense

computerrank wrote: ↑24 May 2019, 06:13 annual ratings updated ...

annual p4p wouldn't be difficult, but I doubt it makes sense

Cool
Yeah, it's a fairly new concept, but I thought it would be interesting to see the top 10 p4p of each year

Martin, is there any reason why you keep Miller in the rankings?

greg wrote: ↑02 Jun 2019, 15:00 Martin, is there any reason why you keep Miller in the rankings?

is there a policy to remove drug users? so were ortiz, stiverne, wach, povetkin etc removed too when they tested positive

jamamb wrote: ↑02 Jun 2019, 15:04 is there a policy to remove drug users? so were ortiz, stiverne, wach, povetkin etc removed too when they tested positive

..don't know actually, just asking...I've not found his name in any other top 15 alphabet rankings..

greg wrote: ↑02 Jun 2019, 15:06 ..don't know actually, just asking...I've not found his name in any other top 15 alphabet rankings..

Boxers are in the Boxrec lists (active) as long as they had a bout within the last year. But it is possible to set them inactive, e.g. when they retire.

As far as I know, there is no Boxrec policy to set them inactive, when suspended for doping. You could ask John ...

I dont care what method you use. If you're Rankings have Ruiz Jr above Wilder, they're flawed. One upset win, and you jump from unranked to top 20? Gimme a break

Myth wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 08:46 I dont care what method you use. If you're Rankings have Ruiz Jr above Wilder, they're flawed. One upset win, and you jump from unranked to top 20? Gimme a break

Ruiz wasn't unranked, he was #15. And Joshua had double the points of Wilder. So Ruiz is #1 at Boxrec now.

computerrank wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 10:12 Ruiz wasn't unranked, he was #15. And Joshua had double the points of Wilder. So Ruiz is #1 at Boxrec now.

Yeh. I mean look at Horn? One win over ManPac and 2 years later, he still has 500 points.

Don’t see why people complain about BoxRec ratings. It’s all computer based.

Myth wrote: ↑03 Jun 2019, 08:46 I dont care what method you use. If you're Rankings have Ruiz Jr above Wilder, they're flawed. One upset win, and you jump from unranked to top 20? Gimme a break

booomb squuuuad!