BoxRec does not go with emotions - it goes with figures. Beterbiev never defeated an opponent near to the quality Bivol did with Alvarez and Ramirez. An even if he would defeat Liam Smith now - that would not reach to Bivol's win against Alvarez,darwinjonas wrote: ↑21 Aug 2023, 11:59 Beterbiev rating #26 p4p.... I just laugh. When Beterbiev had the IBF & WBC (without WBO) and they put Callum Smith #1 in LHW. I laugh even more....![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Ratings - please read before commenting
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
-
darwinjonas
- Bantamweight
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 25 Jul 2021, 13:42
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Govzdyk was better than Bivol. Govzdyk was #9 p4p by ESPN after he beat and KO Adonis Stevenson and Beterbiev annihilated Govzdyk . Zurdo has 0 skill. He fought only against low ranking boxer like #100-#400 who no body know. The little Canelo don't fight against high ratio KO boxer except if he is old and over the hill like GGG and washed like Kovalev. Beterbiev gave a better lesson of Boxing in less than 2 rounds than Bivol in 12 rounds against Joe Smith Jr. You told '' BoxRec does not go with emotions '' and you mentioned Liam Smith instead Callum Smith. When Callum Smith jump at 175 he was #1 LHW and he beat nobody even at 168 he beat nobody.... I discovered Boxrec is a UK site and they overrate their UK boxers....computerrank wrote: ↑21 Aug 2023, 16:15BoxRec does not go with emotions - it goes with figures. Beterbiev never defeated an opponent near to the quality Bivol did with Alvarez and Ramirez. An even if he would defeat Liam Smith now - that would not reach to Bivol's win against Alvarez,darwinjonas wrote: ↑21 Aug 2023, 11:59 Beterbiev rating #26 p4p.... I just laugh. When Beterbiev had the IBF & WBC (without WBO) and they put Callum Smith #1 in LHW. I laugh even more....![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
I don't think declarations should be figured into these things at all. Guys say all kinds of things. It should just strictly be like if they've fought in x amount of months, they are active, and if they haven't, they are inactive.computerrank wrote: ↑21 Jul 2023, 16:39He declared his retirement ...SportsRatings wrote: ↑21 Jul 2023, 10:12 How is Teofimo Lopez "inactive" and not ranked at Super Light ?
He just won 1.5 months ago, and he beat the #2 guy ?
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
When did Joshua pass Fury in the heavyweight rankings? I swear I checked after the Helenius fight and saw that he was #2, and that was just a few days ago.
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
This is not decided by the ratings algorithm, but by the editors.squiggy wrote: ↑26 Aug 2023, 13:10I don't think declarations should be figured into these things at all. Guys say all kinds of things. It should just strictly be like if they've fought in x amount of months, they are active, and if they haven't, they are inactive.computerrank wrote: ↑21 Jul 2023, 16:39He declared his retirement ...SportsRatings wrote: ↑21 Jul 2023, 10:12 How is Teofimo Lopez "inactive" and not ranked at Super Light ?
He just won 1.5 months ago, and he beat the #2 guy ?
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
There was a change in the ratings algorithm on 2023-08-18 - after the Joshua fight. See notice here:
viewtopic.php?t=249171&start=362
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Whoa, it seems very questionable for Joshua to pass Fury... even from an objective standpoint. I can see no other legitimate outcome than to either have Fury 1 / Usyk 2, or vice-versa...
I understand the reason why..... I always felt that the 18 month period was a bit harsh... Have something similar at my site and it has always been at 36 months.
BoxRec has a big place in the boxing landscape.. but still can't expect promoters and boxers to abide by minimum opposition standards, which seems to suggest leniency being the only fair option -- just my two cents.
I understand the reason why..... I always felt that the 18 month period was a bit harsh... Have something similar at my site and it has always been at 36 months.
BoxRec has a big place in the boxing landscape.. but still can't expect promoters and boxers to abide by minimum opposition standards, which seems to suggest leniency being the only fair option -- just my two cents.
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
The latest Elite Amateur National titles were held in perth.
Please refer to results and rannkings are way out in most divisions.
There are novices ranked above Champions.
And the new champions not ranked or recognised.
Thankyou.
Please refer to results and rannkings are way out in most divisions.
There are novices ranked above Champions.
And the new champions not ranked or recognised.
Thankyou.
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
What boxers are you talking about? Boxrec ID numbers, please.
-
margaret thatcher
- Featherweight
- Posts: 39204
- Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
mw aint the strongest division at the moment, but how the hell is this guy rated #15
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/793452
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/793452
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
The SD against #28 Light Middleweight Jorge Garcia Perez made him #15 Middleweight.margaret thatcher wrote: ↑27 Sep 2023, 19:44 mw aint the strongest division at the moment, but how the hell is this guy rated #15
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/793452
-
dawudboxer
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 204
- Joined: 01 Feb 2014, 05:33
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Because he defeated #2dawudboxer wrote: ↑07 Oct 2023, 13:34 Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???
-
margaret thatcher
- Featherweight
- Posts: 39204
- Joined: 22 Jul 2019, 15:43
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
boxrec loves some chris eubank jr, not his first time at #1 
-
SportsRatings
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 679
- Joined: 26 May 2010, 23:15
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Are the undercard fights on Fury-Ngannou going to count in the ratings? I assume that Fury-Ngannou won't since it isn't listed. Who makes the call on this?
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Dubai commission who normally supervise there told us they think the event is unsanctioned.SportsRatings wrote: ↑13 Oct 2023, 01:17 Are the undercard fights on Fury-Ngannou going to count in the ratings? I assume that Fury-Ngannou won't since it isn't listed. Who makes the call on this?
-
dawudboxer
- Super Welterweight
- Posts: 204
- Joined: 01 Feb 2014, 05:33
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
And how is Liam Smith number two? Canelo is number one, there are many others better than Smith.computerrank wrote: ↑07 Oct 2023, 14:51Because he defeated #2dawudboxer wrote: ↑07 Oct 2023, 13:34 Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???![]()
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
You think many others are better than Smith - BoxRec ratings evaluation of the bouts does not ...dawudboxer wrote: ↑22 Oct 2023, 07:55And how is Liam Smith number two? Canelo is number one, there are many others better than Smith.computerrank wrote: ↑07 Oct 2023, 14:51Because he defeated #2dawudboxer wrote: ↑07 Oct 2023, 13:34 Why are boxrec rankings so God awful? And how the hell is Chris Eubank Jr rated number one in the world???![]()
Alvarez is not assigned to Middleweight, but to Super Middleweight.
Smith's defining win is against Vargas valid 15.6 points.
Nursaltanov's defining win is against Takesado valid 8.1 points.
Adames' defining win is against Derevanchenko valid 6.7 points.
Alimkhanyl's definign win is against Gualtierei valid 3.5 points.
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
The inactivity limit is again 12 months as it was before COVID-19.
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Fury's rating is defined by his best win against Wilder. But it is 24 months ago now. It once was worth 40.5 points, but now only 16.6 points. Whyte win is worth 14.3 points. Chisora win only 8 points.Cobwebcat wrote: ↑23 Oct 2023, 13:31How does that explain Fury dropping to 3 though?computerrank wrote: ↑23 Oct 2023, 13:27The inactivity limit is again 12 months as it was before COVID-19.
Usyk's best against Joshua is worth 30.3 points.
Joshua's best performance, his close loss against Usyk is worth 20.7 points.
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Is it a joke? Beterbiev #33 p4p

-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Inactive time, winner above loser rule, ratings cap by best performance within a recent time period with decaying value of performances are BoxRec additions to the generalized Whole History algorithm - indroduced independent of the predictability optimisation of the Whole History algorithm.
See https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/BoxRe ... escription
The generalized Whole History algorithm would have; Fury 66.47, Usyk 32,46 and Joshua 27.25.
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Question regarding Rating
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/660104
On the whatif Feature before the fight happened (Vs. Abraham Ramirez)if Wagner won he would go to #16. He won by TKO and he didnt move to #16. Even still if i do the Whatif it says #16.
Can i get a better understanding on why please
thankyou
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/660104
On the whatif Feature before the fight happened (Vs. Abraham Ramirez)if Wagner won he would go to #16. He won by TKO and he didnt move to #16. Even still if i do the Whatif it says #16.
Can i get a better understanding on why please
thankyou
-
computerrank
- Editor

- Posts: 2492
- Joined: 04 Jan 2003, 18:59
Re: Ratings - please read before commenting
Sorry, whatif Wagner vs Ramirez shows #29 as best outcome for Wagner, who is now #29 after his win against Ramirez.Donnymac wrote: ↑24 Oct 2023, 07:53 Question regarding Rating
https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/660104
On the whatif Feature before the fight happened (Vs. Abraham Ramirez)if Wagner won he would go to #16. He won by TKO and he didnt move to #16. Even still if i do the Whatif it says #16.
Can i get a better understanding on why please
thankyou
And I additionally tested it with this win eliminated, and I get the same whatif: Wagner is #29 and is #29 after a best win against Ramirez.