As I said before ... I think it's great ... it shows a lot ...
... but it hardly qualifies, at least visually at this point, as a "pyramid" ... more like a matrix ... (despite the internal "pyramidal" lines of each fighter's record) ...
Nonetheless ... theoretically ... it IS a pyramid ... (an implied pyramid, anyway) ... but to show that visually you would have to show all (or more) of each fighters wins ...
... (let me think about it some) ...
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 16 Jul 2018, 10:43
by squiggy
Matrix does seem like a better word.
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 16 Jul 2018, 15:22
by computerrank
My questions:
- what measures determinate the vertical position?
-- White's high position is based on only very low positioned defeateted opponents
-- Parker the same ...
-- Pulev the same ...
-- Bellew and Haye the same ...
I guess, in effect you position boxers, where you think, they should be
The graph intents a first impression to be objective - but in fact, I can not see the objectives behind
So it could look like this or that - in fact it is not defined
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 16 Jul 2018, 16:08
by KiwiRider
Sequitorian wrote: ↑16 Jul 2018, 09:54
... (let me think about it some) ...
Sequitorian wrote: ↑16 Jul 2018, 09:54
... (let me think about it some) ...
...?...
Patience, my friend ... patience ... It's a ten-hour process ... and I ain't but an hour or so in ...
... (I don't know if you Brits get this) ...
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 18 Jul 2018, 07:42
by Sequitorian
I think the first step in moving (visually) toward a more pyramidal model of rankings ... (in any division) ... would be to divide the pyramid into three or four tiers ... with the undisputed champ at the very pinnacle (currently empty for heavyweights) ... the top contenders just below it in the top-tier "Tier 1" (Joshua, Fury & Wilder) ... less-credible contenders in the next tier down "Tier 2" (Povetkin, Parker, Breazeale, etc.) ... and so on ... down to Tier 3 ... maybe 4 ...
The fact that there are fewer contenders in the upper tiers would give it a naturally pyramidal shape ...
Step 2 would be to quantify it using BoxRec numbers ... (Jushua currently has 673 points ... Wilder 389 ... etc.) ...
computerrank wrote: ↑16 Jul 2018, 15:22
My questions:
- what measures determinate the vertical position?
-- White's high position is based on only very low positioned defeateted opponents
-- Parker the same ...
-- Pulev the same ...
-- Bellew and Haye the same ...
I guess, in effect you position boxers, where you think, they should be
The graph intents a first impression to be objective - but in fact, I can not see the objectives behind
So it could look like this or that - in fact it is not defined
I put all the top 50 names in one white screen and started to put lines between them with the winner on top ander the loser below.
I wanted to avoid lines going through names while doing this.
Already quite soon I realised it's more easy to put boxers on the place where they belong, otherwise you'll soon struggle with the lines, so top contenders at the top, rubbish fighters on the bottom and average boxers in the middle.
Boxers that have never fought anyone in the boxrec top 50 were put on the side.
I know that I put the boxers on the place where they belong according to me, without good reasoning except for watching the fights and that way know how good a boxer is or isn't. Also, it was the most easy thing to do and if I'm wrong I'll have a hell of a job when I'm proven wrong. Luckely I'm not wrong that often, I think I can continue with this picture and web for at least 6 months before I need to replace names. Maybe over time I'll remove the retired names.
Welcome back Chepppaaa!
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 18 Jul 2018, 15:15
by Ilya Muromets
Very nicely drawn chart, Astradamus, thought I'm not convinced of its actual relevance.
Wlad is retired.
Name on the left column that I haven't heard of lately, Big Zhang from China. He fights a jobber in Mafia Vegas Friday. They'll sell a lot of tickets to the Chinese gambling tourists.
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 18 Jul 2018, 15:26
by keirw
Interesting piece of work, a bit sad seeing Del boy at the bottom though.
Couldn't we shoehorn Malik Scott in so he can have at least one win?
Like a Boss wrote: ↑18 Jul 2018, 20:09
Would like to see more lines on the matrix. Perhaps turn it into a flow chart by including arrows and yes/no notations.
Go ahead, do with the picture whatever you like
It got so big and complicated it doesn't fit on my screen any more
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 21 Jul 2018, 06:00
by funso banjo baby
I would call it a non-causal nexus
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 09 Sep 2018, 21:21
by Sequitorian
With my right eye covered I like the one on top ... but with my left eye covered I'd have to go with the one on the bottom ...
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 09 Sep 2018, 21:27
by squiggy
That thing is intense, man.
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 09 Sep 2018, 21:32
by gilgamesh
I can't make head or tail of it. Could've been a little more clear
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 24 Oct 2018, 17:07
by Ruthless-RKO
This gonna get updated?
Re: The heavyweight pyramid
Posted: 26 Oct 2018, 17:47
by ReggieDiggs
squiggy wrote: ↑09 Sep 2018, 21:27
That thing is intense, man.
LOL I agree. I can't quit looking at it. I'm a fan.
I think you could come up with a more realistic & fair ranking system by this maybe. I think you'd just have to include more boxers is the thing. Which I'd want no part of adding cuz it looks like a hell of a task to have done already.
And if you could automate this with new results being put in & it'd form w/e new matrix (matrix is a better name btw) that result would require it'd be amazing to watch it change & grow. over time
squiggy wrote: ↑09 Sep 2018, 21:27
That thing is intense, man.
LOL I agree. I can't quit looking at it. I'm a fan.
I think you could come up with a more realistic & fair ranking system by this maybe. I think you'd just have to include more boxers is the thing. Which I'd want no part of adding cuz it looks like a hell of a task to have done already.
And if you could automate this with new results being put in & it'd form w/e new matrix (matrix is a better name btw) that result would require it'd be amazing to watch it change & grow. over time
squiggy wrote: ↑09 Sep 2018, 21:27
That thing is intense, man.
LOL I agree. I can't quit looking at it. I'm a fan.
I think you could come up with a more realistic & fair ranking system by this maybe. I think you'd just have to include more boxers is the thing. Which I'd want no part of adding cuz it looks like a hell of a task to have done already.
And if you could automate this with new results being put in & it'd form w/e new matrix (matrix is a better name btw) that result would require it'd be amazing to watch it change & grow. over time
...
