BoxRec

Here is the link to the independent top 100 in all divisions.

www.premierboxingorganisation.com/heavyweight-200

Jacobs hasn't been updated.

Well spotted and thank you. Result inputted and corrected now, makes a fair bit of difference too, with Jacobs back up to number 3.

Lennox wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 13:50 Well spotted and thank you. Result inputted and corrected now, makes a fair bit of difference too, with Jacobs back up to number 3.

You're welcome.

I like these rankings.

Wow, MW rankings are horrendous. Charlo over Saunders, Andrade over Derevyanchenko? I also like how Antonio Margarito is somehow in your top 20 at JMW.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:31 Wow, MW rankings are horrendous. Charlo over Saunders, Andrade over Derevyanchenko? I also like how Antonio Margarito is somehow in your top 20 at JMW.

These rankings are about opposition.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:33

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:31 Wow, MW rankings are horrendous. Charlo over Saunders, Andrade over Derevyanchenko? I also like how Antonio Margarito is somehow in your top 20 at JMW.

These rankings are about opposition.

Yeah and Andrade's best win is still Vanes, Charlo's best win is still a prospect, and Antonio Margarito is way past prime to even think about putting him above Erickson Lubin. It's ridiculous. Your entire ratings are a joke.

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:37

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:33

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:31 Wow, MW rankings are horrendous. Charlo over Saunders, Andrade over Derevyanchenko? I also like how Antonio Margarito is somehow in your top 20 at JMW.

These rankings are about opposition.

Yeah and Andrade's best win is still Vanes, Charlo's best win is still a prospect, and Antonio Margarito is way past prime to even think about putting him above Erickson Lubin. It's ridiculous. Your entire ratings are a joke.

You clearly don't understand them. Don't look at them.

A new thread, every... single.. month?

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 17:08

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:37

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:33

These rankings are about opposition.

Yeah and Andrade's best win is still Vanes, Charlo's best win is still a prospect, and Antonio Margarito is way past prime to even think about putting him above Erickson Lubin. It's ridiculous. Your entire ratings are a joke.

You clearly don't understand them. Don't look at them.

Mexi-Box has a wild opinion about most things. Look at the opposition of Margarito for his last three fights, yes he is past his prime but Lubin has not beaten better. Your assumption that because of that the entire ratings are a joke just about sums you up.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:33

Mexi-Box wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 15:31 Wow, MW rankings are horrendous. Charlo over Saunders, Andrade over Derevyanchenko? I also like how Antonio Margarito is somehow in your top 20 at JMW.

These rankings are about opposition.

Whilst I appreciate the rankings are heavily-skewed according to the calibre of opposition faced, I’m a little confused as to the reason why Jeff Horn is rated as the top-dog of the PBO’s welterweight rankings?

Are these rankings calculated in a mathematical manner using stats, which means that the Aussie has been ranked unreasonably high due to his highly-controversial victory over the faded Hall-of-Famer Manny Pacquiao?

If so, it seems that the PBO's ratings system has the same sort of flaws that BoxRec's rankings have.

Yeah, you could say its a flaw that Jeff Horn is number 1 at WW.

He beat Pacman, most people thought Horn won. It is quite hard to have a method that ignores a result, the only way we do it is if the majority (76%) of people thought the judges got it right.

Lennox wrote: ↑30 Apr 2018, 05:24 Yeah, you could say its a flaw that Jeff Horn is number 1 at WW.

He beat Pacman, most people thought Horn won. It is quite hard to have a method that ignores a result, the only way we do it is if the majority (76%) of people thought the judges got it right.

I’ve seen articles listing the aggregated media scorecards, coupled with detailing their respective sources, claiming that only 10% (7 out of 67) thought the Aussie deserved his victory over the Filipino.

However, I digress, I appreciate that no rankings system is perfect, since opinions are very subjective in nature and mathematical equations cannot reliably reflect reality.

If I could see that evidence it could be changed.

Lennox wrote: ↑30 Apr 2018, 06:43 If I could see that evidence it could be changed.

Click on the red hyperlink in my previous post.

Martin Murray and Amir Khan too high, and when is Tyson Fury ranked, he hasn't fought in years?

Lennox wrote: ↑30 Apr 2018, 06:43 If I could see that evidence it could be changed.

I will get this changed, I have found clear evidence now. Thanks.

Overriding official results seems like a messy business..

If there were some protocol to say.. hey, if a fighter has a clear home advantage, hedge the scores by X in a decision.. I could better stomach that.

Lennox wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 13:50 Well spotted and thank you. Result inputted and corrected now, makes a fair bit of difference too, with Jacobs back up to number 3.

Looks like you added in Jacobs, but Sulecki is still missing from the rankings.

Serragon wrote: ↑30 Apr 2018, 13:25

Lennox wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 13:50 Well spotted and thank you. Result inputted and corrected now, makes a fair bit of difference too, with Jacobs back up to number 3.

Looks like you added in Jacobs, but Sulecki is still missing from the rankings.

Sulecki is still considered a jnr-middleweight.

JCS wrote: ↑30 Apr 2018, 13:07 Overriding official results seems like a messy business..

If there were some protocol to say.. hey, if a fighter has a clear home advantage, hedge the scores by X in a decision.. I could better stomach that.

We always did it on a 76% rule. Just missed this one, I think the fact the WBO re-scored it still for Horn put me off the scent and I don't really recall the fight be as controversial as the 7 - 55.

If you add a hometown bias as a formula it will get crazy. Since (Mads Larsen loss to Trevor Ambrose) we have had over-riders. It helps to balance a computer giving that crazy print out.

Lennox wrote: ↑30 Apr 2018, 14:56

JCS wrote: ↑30 Apr 2018, 13:07 Overriding official results seems like a messy business..

If there were some protocol to say.. hey, if a fighter has a clear home advantage, hedge the scores by X in a decision.. I could better stomach that.

We always did it on a 76% rule. Just missed this one, I think the fact the WBO re-scored it still for Horn put me off the scent and I don't really recall the fight be as controversial as the 7 - 55.

If you add a hometown bias as a formula it will get crazy. Since (Mads Larsen loss to Trevor Ambrose) we have had over-riders. It helps to balance a computer giving that crazy print out.

Larsen loss to Ambrose was a stoppage...not a decision.

Not really a stoppage as such, Ambrose cut him in a headclash and Larsens eye was that bad he could not continue under the UK rules at that time Trevor Ambrose won. It was clearly stupid, Mogens Palle rightly complained and we agreed. Later the BBBc changed their rule as well.