Page 1 of 2
Boxrec ratings
Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 18:15
by nivek535
Has BoxRec ever considered applying the Elo Rating System to boxers?
If considered before, why hasn't it been done?
If not considered, why not?
I like the current rating system, but by introducing the Elo Rating System, we could extract even more information out of the statistics right?
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 18:38
by JCS
ELO has serious limitations and quite frankly, isn't a great option for a combat sport with infrequent, sporadic schedules and (sometimes) strange matchmaking.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 19:17
by ikorolev
JCS wrote:ELO has serious limitations and quite frankly, isn't a great option for a combat sport with infrequent, sporadic schedules and (sometimes) strange matchmaking.
I think low frequency equally hurts any rating system, the same way as bad matchmaking. ELO system seems to have more flexibility/accuracy, because it can be based on judges' scores instead of just KO/US/MD/SD options. Of course, judges scores are often faulty, but again that hurts both systems.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 20:57
by JCS
ikorolev wrote:JCS wrote:ELO has serious limitations and quite frankly, isn't a great option for a combat sport with infrequent, sporadic schedules and (sometimes) strange matchmaking.
I think low frequency equally hurts any rating system, the same way as bad matchmaking. ELO system seems to have more flexibility/accuracy, because it can be based on judges' scores instead of just KO/US/MD/SD options. Of course, judges scores are often faulty, but again that hurts both systems.
MMA ELO is a web site that uses ELO with MMA instead of Boxing. The results are pretty horrible.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 03:12
by nivek535
JCS wrote:ikorolev wrote:JCS wrote:ELO has serious limitations and quite frankly, isn't a great option for a combat sport with infrequent, sporadic schedules and (sometimes) strange matchmaking.
I think low frequency equally hurts any rating system, the same way as bad matchmaking. ELO system seems to have more flexibility/accuracy, because it can be based on judges' scores instead of just KO/US/MD/SD options. Of course, judges scores are often faulty, but again that hurts both systems.
MMA ELO is a web site that uses ELO with MMA instead of Boxing. The results are pretty horrible.
interesting.
care to explain why ELO has serious limitations and the current boxrec ratings is better than it?
Sorry, not necessarily better, but why wouldnt an Elo rating BENEFIT as another point of reference?
care to explain why the results are horrible?
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 09:57
by JCS
nivek535 wrote:JCS wrote:ikorolev wrote:
I think low frequency equally hurts any rating system, the same way as bad matchmaking. ELO system seems to have more flexibility/accuracy, because it can be based on judges' scores instead of just KO/US/MD/SD options. Of course, judges scores are often faulty, but again that hurts both systems.
MMA ELO is a web site that uses ELO with MMA instead of Boxing. The results are pretty horrible.
interesting.
care to explain why ELO has serious limitations and the current boxrec ratings is better than it?
Sorry, not necessarily better, but why wouldnt an Elo rating BENEFIT as another point of reference?
care to explain why the results are horrible?
I don't really feel like getting in a long drawn out debate. If you haven't noticed, there is a 100-page post at the top of this board all about the ratings.
ELO was invented for chess. This is a sport where there are still active grandmasters over 80 years old. BoxRec's system was invented for pro boxing. A sport where people get punched in the face.
ELO has (at least) one critical flaw. Fighters' ratings can become bloated just for winning, with no regard for the quality of the opposition. Anderson Silva is still #1 at MW.
Glicko2 would be a better choice than ELO.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 10:05
by Tony1244
Boxrec ratings, I think, are based on results, while other ratings, like a magazines, are based on results as well as perceived ability.
And we all know what the alphabets rating are based on: $$$$$$$$$
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 13:31
by tiny_acres
Just put names in a hat and pull the out randomly.
That would be better than the alphabet bull crap
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 13:34
by ikorolev
Why are we talking about alphabet ratings? ELO rating are computerized ratings which can be based on scores (judges' cards).
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 13:42
by JCS
ikorolev wrote:Why are we talking about alphabet ratings? ELO rating are computerized ratings which can be based on scores (judges' cards).
BoxRec ratings factor in scorecards.. what happens when it isn't a decision?
If you want to get hung up on a public rating system with a name, check out Glicko2.
An ELO system would last exactly one day in the boxing world. Once everyone still saw Wladimir as #1, they'd toss it to the curb. Not saying that'd be any different with Glicko2, but it has a volatility factor you could use to help w/ the issue of sporadic scheduling.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 13:52
by Tony1244
ikorolev wrote:Why are we talking about alphabet ratings? ELO rating are computerized ratings which can be based on scores (judges' cards).
To educate very new fans, and to continuously remind old fans that the alphabet ratings are 100% Unadulterated Complete
BS.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 18:44
by nivek535
is my question vague or is everybody just off topic >_>?
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 19:42
by JCS
nivek535 wrote:is my question vague or is everybody just off topic >_>?
Maybe you're not comprehending my replies?
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 20:37
by Like a Boss
JCS wrote:nivek535 wrote:JCS wrote:
MMA ELO is a web site that uses ELO with MMA instead of Boxing. The results are pretty horrible.
interesting.
care to explain why ELO has serious limitations and the current boxrec ratings is better than it?
Sorry, not necessarily better, but why wouldnt an Elo rating BENEFIT as another point of reference?
care to explain why the results are horrible?
ELO has (at least) one critical flaw. Fighters' ratings can become bloated just for winning, with no regard for the quality of the opposition. Anderson Silva is still #1 at MW.
If correct, that means an unbeaten club fighter could potentially be rated #1 in the world.
Mind you there are fighters who, in the current climate, are rated top 10 by organisations despite them never having beaten anyone in the top 50, and in the case of some CVs, the top 100.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 21:06
by Boxing Prospect
In a semi connected note...Went through the welterweight rankings earlier and spotted Tsiko Mulovhedzi (10-7-3, 6) ranked at #11...certainly raised an eye brow
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 12 Jan 2016, 21:43
by JCS
Boxing Prospect wrote:In a semi connected note...Went through the welterweight rankings earlier and spotted Tsiko Mulovhedzi (10-7-3, 6) ranked at #11...certainly raised an eye brow
Yes, that's the old... regional pooling problem (South Africa in this case). Not that ELO would handle that much better.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 05:02
by nivek535
JCS wrote:nivek535 wrote:is my question vague or is everybody just off topic >_>?
Maybe you're not comprehending my replies?
how does elo do this?
"ELO has (at least) one critical flaw.
Fighters' ratings can become bloated just for winning, with no regard for the quality of the opposition. Anderson Silva is still #1 at MW."
the elo of a boxer will barely change if he defeats a boxer with significantly much lower elo..
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 05:29
by Lennox
Try these:
www.premierboxingorganisation.com
It is a points system but based on connecting fighters that have been matched, so it is primarly based on the man that beat the man.
Problems such as inactivity, not facing good opposition within a time frame, getting old, moving weight classes are all factored in and these are the main problems of any system.
These ratings are the work of 25 years of lineage. The initial database was created by taking every fighter rated by an organisation (main 4) and magazines and then researching their records. Anyone who beat anyone in that first database was added. About 10% of the current top 100 in any weight class have never beaten anyone in the top 100, so they have got there by beating someone in the top 200 and just gaining points for relatively mild fights. It is rare to make the top 70 without fighting decent opposition. Ali Raymi got as high as 46 beating 26 nobodies he could never have done it at the higher weight class though.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 10:04
by JCS
nivek535 wrote:JCS wrote:nivek535 wrote:is my question vague or is everybody just off topic >_>?
Maybe you're not comprehending my replies?
how does elo do this?
"ELO has (at least) one critical flaw.
Fighters' ratings can become bloated just for winning, with no regard for the quality of the opposition. Anderson Silva is still #1 at MW."
the elo of a boxer will barely change if he defeats a boxer with significantly much lower elo..
You should probably read up a bit more on this.. but you answered your own question.
If a fighter gets high enough by continually winning, then when he loses.. like you said, his rating barely changes.
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 10:09
by computerrank
nivek535 wrote:JCS wrote:nivek535 wrote:is my question vague or is everybody just off topic >_>?
Maybe you're not comprehending my replies?
how does elo do this?
"ELO has (at least) one critical flaw.
Fighters' ratings can become bloated just for winning, with no regard for the quality of the opposition. Anderson Silva is still #1 at MW."
the elo of a boxer will barely change if he defeats a boxer with significantly much lower elo..
Boxrec elo ratings would look like this
Code: Select all
M Welterweight 1343 46 34 Keith Thurman
M Welterweight 1336 90 34 Timothy Bradley Jr
M Welterweight 1327 44 27 Shawn Porter
M Welterweight 1323 78 31 Amir Khan
M Welterweight 1310 341 39 Manny Pacquiao
M Welterweight 1308 67 28 Danny Garcia
M Welterweight 1280 42 28 Vyacheslav Senchenko
M Welterweight 1274 37 31 Kell Brook
M Welterweight 1271 37 23 Paul Malignaggi
M Welterweight 1269 9 20 Dmitry Mikhaylenko
M Welterweight 1264 15 20 Frankie Gavin
M Super Middleweight 1313 152 29 Andre Dirrell
M Super Middleweight 1294 21 35 James DeGale
M Super Middleweight 1273 20 22 Gilberto Ramirez
M Super Middleweight 1263 14 27 Blake Caparello
M Super Middleweight 1258 130 32 Lucian Bute
M Super Middleweight 1257 27 21 George Groves
M Super Middleweight 1246 9 22 Anthony Dirrell
M Super Middleweight 1240 8 19 Rogelio Medina
M Super Middleweight 1240 7 25 Badou Jack
M Super Middleweight 1240 4 28 Callum Smith
M Super Flyweight 1281 43 16 Carlos Cuadras
M Super Flyweight 1276 44 16 Naoya Inoue
M Super Flyweight 1266 30 12 McJoe Arroyo
M Super Flyweight 1227 39 10 Oleydong Sithsamerchai
M Super Flyweight 1209 93 14 Omar Andres Narvaez
M Super Flyweight 1201 26 16 Zolani Tete
M Super Flyweight 1200 22 19 Kohei Kono
M Super Flyweight 1197 7 7 Norberto Jimenez
M Super Flyweight 1194 59 9 Sonny Boy Jaro
M Super Flyweight 1194 5 6 Jonathan Arias
M Super Featherweight 1307 15 10 Jason Sosa
M Super Featherweight 1300 141 21 Takashi Uchiyama
M Super Featherweight 1268 97 28 Nicholas Walters
M Super Featherweight 1264 17 16 Oscar Valdez
M Super Featherweight 1264 12 22 Francisco Vargas
M Super Featherweight 1263 6 13 Juli Giner
M Super Featherweight 1241 9 13 Jezreel Corrales
M Super Featherweight 1239 7 19 Javier Fortuna
M Super Featherweight 1229 192 18 Orlando Salido
M Super Featherweight 1228 5 18 Jomthong Chuwatana
M Super Bantamweight 1271 12 13 Albert Pagara
M Super Bantamweight 1255 36 10 Alejandro Hernandez
M Super Bantamweight 1252 14 16 Julio Ceja
M Super Bantamweight 1241 18 22 Guillermo Rigondeaux
M Super Bantamweight 1241 14 17 Carl Frampton
M Super Bantamweight 1240 15 17 Scott Quigg
M Super Bantamweight 1232 11 16 Shingo Wake
M Super Bantamweight 1227 217 22 Nonito Donaire
M Super Bantamweight 1226 26 10 Tshifhiwa Munyai
M Super Bantamweight 1198 7 16 Ryo Matsumoto
M Minimumweight 1248 63 7 Carlos Buitrago
M Minimumweight 1235 11 9 Kosei Tanaka
M Minimumweight 1211 18 10 Wanheng Menayothin
M Minimumweight 1182 6 9 Knockout CP Freshmart
M Minimumweight 1178 3 4 Siphamanda Baleni
M Minimumweight 1175 30 12 Hekkie Budler
M Minimumweight 1174 5 8 Simphiwe Khonco
M Minimumweight 1170 15 7 Jesus Silvestre
M Minimumweight 1160 2 7 Panya Pradabsri
M Minimumweight 1153 6 8 Chao Zhong Xiong
M Middleweight 1356 122 33 Gennady Golovkin
M Middleweight 1337 34 40 Daniel Jacobs
M Middleweight 1327 141 40 Saul Alvarez
M Middleweight 1294 27 30 David Lemieux
M Middleweight 1287 88 29 Daniel Geale
M Middleweight 1284 13 30 Willie Monroe Jr
M Middleweight 1278 63 28 Joshua Clottey
M Middleweight 1276 8 17 Dmitry Chudinov
M Middleweight 1258 11 25 Maciej Sulecki
M Middleweight 1256 7 16 Ievgen Khytrov
M Lightweight 1353 73 20 Rances Barthelemy
M Lightweight 1324 57 19 Jorge Linares
M Lightweight 1312 32 19 Dejan Zlaticanin
M Lightweight 1298 38 16 Algenis Mendez
M Lightweight 1279 38 6 Ivan Cano
M Lightweight 1265 28 19 Malcolm Klassen
M Lightweight 1262 50 19 Denis Shafikov
M Lightweight 1259 10 17 Terry Flanagan
M Lightweight 1250 12 13 Xolisani Ndongeni
M Lightweight 1247 25 22 Petr Petrov
M Light Welterweight 1359 89 25 Terence Crawford
M Light Welterweight 1334 22 18 Ruslan Provodnikov
M Light Welterweight 1307 14 28 Viktor Postol
M Light Welterweight 1264 110 24 Adrien Broner
M Light Welterweight 1240 6 20 Eduard Troyanovsky
M Light Welterweight 1230 8 12 Mike Dallas Jr
M Light Welterweight 1221 3 22 Adrian Granados
M Light Welterweight 1213 3 16 Walter Castillo
M Light Welterweight 1212 4 13 Min Wook Kim
M Light Welterweight 1210 6 18 Thomas Dulorme
M Light Middleweight 1428 169 36 Erislandy Lara
M Light Middleweight 1351 182 39 Miguel Cotto
M Light Middleweight 1300 65 31 Austin Trout
M Light Middleweight 1299 20 28 Ishe Smith
M Light Middleweight 1290 46 31 James Kirkland
M Light Middleweight 1282 18 28 Jermell Charlo
M Light Middleweight 1273 8 22 Willie Nelson
M Light Middleweight 1265 13 31 Demetrius Andrade
M Light Middleweight 1262 645 34 Shane Mosley
M Light Middleweight 1247 5 34 Jermall Charlo
M Light Heavyweight 1376 92 41 Sergey Kovalev
M Light Heavyweight 1342 139 40 Adonis Stevenson
M Light Heavyweight 1319 74 43 Andre Ward
M Light Heavyweight 1295 32 26 Nathan Cleverly
M Light Heavyweight 1271 20 33 Edwin Rodriguez
M Light Heavyweight 1267 41 24 Juergen Braehmer
M Light Heavyweight 1264 14 37 Artur Beterbiev
M Light Heavyweight 1259 27 25 Sullivan Barrera
M Light Heavyweight 1259 26 28 Eleider Alvarez
M Light Heavyweight 1253 26 26 Isaac Chilemba
M Light Flyweight 1262 49 12 Donnie Nietes
M Light Flyweight 1247 21 8 Randy Petalcorin
M Light Flyweight 1228 30 13 Akira Yaegashi
M Light Flyweight 1198 8 7 Koji Itagaki
M Light Flyweight 1190 12 7 Jonathan Taconing
M Light Flyweight 1189 34 12 Pedro Guevara
M Light Flyweight 1188 9 10 Rey Loreto
M Light Flyweight 1185 3 9 Mzuvukile Magwaca
M Light Flyweight 1166 5 6 Angel Acosta
M Light Flyweight 1161 13 9 Ryoichi Taguchi
M Heavyweight 1349 185 40 Alexander Povetkin
M Heavyweight 1333 447 39 Wladimir Klitschko
M Heavyweight 1320 35 37 Deontay Wilder
M Heavyweight 1293 30 34 Luis Ortiz
M Heavyweight 1293 16 34 Erkan Teper
M Heavyweight 1292 77 36 Kubrat Pulev
M Heavyweight 1271 43 43 Tyson Fury
M Heavyweight 1257 99 35 Guillermo Jones
M Heavyweight 1245 121 31 Shannon Briggs
M Heavyweight 1244 23 33 Carlos Takam
M Flyweight 1269 108 14 Juan Francisco Estrada
M Flyweight 1248 69 22 Roman Gonzalez
M Flyweight 1214 23 13 Kazuto Ioka
M Flyweight 1210 3 2 Carlos Ariel Farias
M Flyweight 1207 67 12 Edgar Sosa
M Flyweight 1206 101 11 Brian Viloria
M Flyweight 1205 9 7 Vincent Legrand
M Flyweight 1193 10 14 Amnat Ruenroeng
M Flyweight 1189 13 6 Martin Tecuapetla
M Flyweight 1185 18 10 Juan Hernandez
M Featherweight 1298 78 19 Robinson Castellanos
M Featherweight 1286 132 19 Abner Mares
M Featherweight 1270 18 11 Lusanda Komanisi
M Featherweight 1258 13 13 Vasyl Lomachenko
M Featherweight 1251 21 14 Thabo Sonjica
M Featherweight 1245 49 24 Simpiwe Vetyeka
M Featherweight 1240 21 19 Jesus Marcelo Andres Cuellar
M Featherweight 1236 106 21 Leo Santa Cruz
M Featherweight 1231 8 13 Eric Hunter
M Featherweight 1226 11 17 Lee Selby
M Cruiserweight 1310 25 33 Denis Lebedev
M Cruiserweight 1297 21 28 Ola Afolabi
M Cruiserweight 1289 6 37 Ilunga Makabu
M Cruiserweight 1281 4 28 Krzysztof Glowacki
M Cruiserweight 1280 12 37 Grigory Drozd
M Cruiserweight 1279 7 18 Mateusz Masternak
M Cruiserweight 1276 3 28 Olanrewaju Durodola
M Cruiserweight 1272 3 25 Mairis Briedis
M Cruiserweight 1268 8 19 Francisco Palacios
M Cruiserweight 1262 6 22 Dmytro Kucher
M Bantamweight 1286 215 12 Anselmo Moreno
M Bantamweight 1235 23 14 Lee Haskins
M Bantamweight 1224 35 15 Jamie McDonnell
M Bantamweight 1222 20 9 Yohei Tobe
M Bantamweight 1218 12 9 Kentaro Masuda
M Bantamweight 1211 14 10 Marlon Tapales
M Bantamweight 1210 34 13 Rey Megrino
M Bantamweight 1206 52 19 Juan Carlos Payano
M Bantamweight 1206 9 7 Alexis Santiago
M Bantamweight 1203 5 8 Dixon Flores
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 10:14
by JCS
What K-Factor are you using?
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 10:20
by computerrank
JCS wrote:What K-Factor are you using?
80
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 11:23
by TheWigwam
On Chess.com I have a rating of 1683 and I haven't beaten anyone above 1222, my record is/was something like 123-0-1. The ELO/Glicko system wouldn't suit boxing because you could run up a high score by beating low opposition as I did
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 11:31
by computerrank
TheWigwam wrote:On Chess.com I have a rating of 1683 and I haven't beaten anyone above 1222, my record is/was something like 123-0-1. The ELO/Glicko system wouldn't suit boxing because you could run up a high score by beating low opposition as I did
Re: Boxrec ratings
Posted: 13 Jan 2016, 13:43
by ikorolev
TheWigwam wrote:On Chess.com I have a rating of 1683 and I haven't beaten anyone above 1222, my record is/was something like 123-0-1. The ELO/Glicko system wouldn't suit boxing because you could run up a high score by beating low opposition as I did
My chess.com rating is fluctuating between 1850 and 1900+, and when I beat somebody with low rating, I get NO points.