Ratings - please read before commenting

[computerrank]

I can't see points ratings anywhere. Not on fighter pages, not on event pages, not on bout pages.
There's no option to toggle either. I've tried Firefox and Chrome.

I tried to login with a different email address, and I notice, I really do not see the ratings option mentioned ... I will clarify that ...

Can I see the all-time peak ratings for light heavyweight and super middleweight, please?

I sent you a PM.

[computerrank]

How do you view ratings at the time of the fight? I don't see it on the fighter pages any more.

Just above the list of bouts on the fighter's page you can click on the icon "ratings on/off" in order to see the ratings/or not ...

I confirm the ratings doesn't show for me either, not on the boxer's page, not in the ratings page, nowhere. It is probably due to the new design of the site that was launched for the site that week. I have tried changing the option in my preferences, switching to yes then no then yes again but it has no effect.

It has been reported for months (see my message above from july, I even tried creating a second account to see if that solved the problem)) that this feature is no longer working, at least for basic users (which I am). All we can see are rankings (not ratings), I mean by that, for example, that in one upcoming fight, Yves Ulysse Jr is #28 and Gabriel Goillaz Valenzuela is #42. On the page of a boxer, the current ranking is present again on top (along with the national ranking, Ulysse being #1 in Canada). But there is no column featuring the rating for the boxers, no option to display ratings on/off, and no effect when changing that option on profile settings.

I sent you a PM.

[computerrank]

I can't see points ratings anywhere. Not on fighter pages, not on event pages, not on bout pages.
There's no option to toggle either. I've tried Firefox and Chrome.

I tried to login with a different email address, and I notice, I really do not see the ratings option mentioned ... I will clarify that ...

Yea when I look at the fighter pages I don't see any ratings option. Maybe you have a special account that gives you that ability?

I do see a "display ratings" dropdown in my account settings page, but as far as I can tell it doesn't seem to actually do anything.

I sent you a PM.

[conan_the_cribber]

Hi,

been a while since I've ventured into the ratings world. But a few questions and requests

1) when you look at a fighter's record, there used to be a way to see the before and after ratings for each bout. That way you could see how the ratings progressed. I cannot seem to find that option any more. Does it exist, and if "yes", how do I see it.

2) I was also surprised to see Alvarez leading the p4p ratings and the man that beat him at #3. Since their clash Alvarez has fought a leading middleweight in Golovkin at the super middle weight class and Bivol has fought a top contender at his own weight class - light heavy. This does not seem to be a dramatically different level of opponent, assuming of course that Golovkin loses rating points for fighting in a higher weight class. So I was wondering why Alvarez is still ahead then.

3) Although I don't frequently look at the ratings any more, I have felt for some years that that the p4p ratings are skewed in favour of the heavyweights. There are six heavyweights in the top 25 fighters, which statistically speaking, is odd given there are at least 17 weight classes. Joe Joyce is rated at 15 p4p, though his biggest win is over Joseph Parker, who's biggest win was probably Ruiz, although at the time, Ruiz had beaten no-one of note. It just seems a really thin record then for Joe Joyce to be capitulated into the top 15, and I have the feeling his weight class helps him here.

4) Would it be possible to see the rating numbers in both the p4p lists and in the lists for the weight class? Practically every other sport ranking mechanism ATP, FIFA, cricinfo, World Rugby ratings publish the rating value next to the player as well.

5) Finally, when the p4p list is displayed the weight class is listed. It would be nice if that was an active link to the respective ratings for that weight class. For example, where is says Tyson Fury, five star, heavy, that the "heavy" would be a hyperlink.

Thanks for any information provided.

cheers

conan

[conan_the_cribber]

Oh and finally, it would be nice if the rating algorithm was published in detail. The information on the wiki page is probably only about a tenth of the actual complexity of the algorithm. Are there any reasons why this is not documented?

[computerrank]

Oh and finally, it would be nice if the rating algorithm was published in detail. The information on the wiki page is probably only about a tenth of the actual complexity of the algorithm. Are there any reasons why this is not documented?

Might be extended ...

[computerrank]

Hi,

been a while since I've ventured into the ratings world. But a few questions and requests

1) when you look at a fighter's record, there used to be a way to see the before and after ratings for each bout. That way you could see how the ratings progressed. I cannot seem to find that option any more. Does it exist, and if "yes", how do I see it.

=> It's only showed for some roles currently, not for the normal public user. I will send you a PM.
You can support that request in the thread 'Suggestions for Boxrec". This not a question of the BoxRec ratings algorithm.

2) I was also surprised to see Alvarez leading the p4p ratings and the man that beat him at #3. Since their clash Alvarez has fought a leading middleweight in Golovkin at the super middle weight class and Bivol has fought a top contender at his own weight class - light heavy. This does not seem to be a dramatically different level of opponent, assuming of course that Golovkin loses rating points for fighting in a higher weight class. So I was wondering why Alvarez is still ahead then.

=> Bivol is rated higher than Alvarez at Light Heavyweight. But Alvarez is rated at Super Middleweight, which gives him the edge from a P4P perspective. Bivol is rated higher from an absolute fighting power perspective.

3) Although I don't frequently look at the ratings any more, I have felt for some years that that the p4p ratings are skewed in favour of the heavyweights. There are six heavyweights in the top 25 fighters, which statistically speaking, is odd given there are at least 17 weight classes. Joe Joyce is rated at 15 p4p, though his biggest win is over Joseph Parker, who's biggest win was probably Ruiz, although at the time, Ruiz had beaten no-one of note. It just seems a really thin record then for Joe Joyce to be capitulated into the top 15, and I have the feeling his weight class helps him here.

=> I might change that, as the balance factor between the divisions is quite artificial. See optional P4P list in my next post.

4) Would it be possible to see the rating numbers in both the p4p lists and in the lists for the weight class? Practically every other sport ranking mechanism ATP, FIFA, cricinfo, World Rugby ratings publish the rating value next to the player as well.

=> You can support that request in the thread 'Suggestions for Boxrec". This not a question of the BoxRec ratings algorithm.

5) Finally, when the p4p list is displayed the weight class is listed. It would be nice if that was an active link to the respective ratings for that weight class. For example, where is says Tyson Fury, five star, heavy, that the "heavy" would be a hyperlink.

=> You can support that request in the thread 'Suggestions for Boxrec". This not a question of the BoxRec ratings algorithm.

Thanks for any information provided.

cheers

conan

[computerrank]

@conan_the_cribber & all
Would you prefer a p4p list like this - the perspective is shifted towards lower weight divisions ...

Code: Select all

  1 Super Middleweight    348759 Saul Alvarez                   MX 1223    4.1
  2 Light Heavyweight     703924 Dmitrii Bivol                  RU 1004    4.5
  3 Welterweight          447121 Terence Crawford               US 997.8  20.4
  4 Bantamweight          628407 Naoya Inoue                    JP 821.6  13.9
  5 Middleweight          356831 Gennadiy Golovkin              KZ 702.9  10.5
  6 Heavyweight           479205 Tyson Fury                     GB 554.0  20.3
  7 Welterweight          629465 Errol Spence Jr                US 496.4   8.3
  8 Lightweight           790719 Shakur Stevenson               US 444.4   4.5
  9 Super Bantamweight    700183 Stephen Fulton                 US 384.9   4.5
 10 Middleweight          466535 Liam Smith                     GB 380.2   4.2
 11 Light Welterweight    611370 Regis Prograis                 US 342.1   8.0
 12 Super Featherweight   626343 O'Shaquie Foster               US 323.5   6.0
 13 Super Flyweight       467843 Juan Francisco Estrada         MX 318.8   6.6
 14 Light Welterweight    725709 Josh Taylor                    GB 313.6   4.0
 15 Light Middleweight    433135 Jermell Charlo                 US 297.7  10.5
 16 Light Heavyweight     646981 Artur Beterbiev                CA 297.4  12.2
 17 Lightweight           741718 Devin Haney                    US 281.9   4.9
 18 Lightweight           643387 Gervonta Davis                 US 278.9   7.6
 19 Lightweight           646781 George Kambosos Jr             AU 272.3   5.0
 20 Heavyweight           659772 Oleksandr Usyk                 UA 268.2   6.4
 21 Welterweight          541777 Yordenis Ugas                  CU 248.2   4.6
 22 Light Flyweight       692967 Kenshiro Teraji                JP 245.3   5.8
 23 Super Flyweight       319725 Roman Gonzalez                 NI 225.8   6.6
 24 Bantamweight           48243 Nonito Donaire                 PH 222.6   6.2
 25 Featherweight         718399 Brandon Figueroa               US 216.4   3.9
 26 Heavyweight           659461 Anthony Joshua                 GB 215.2   6.2
 27 Super Flyweight       483786 Kazuto Ioka                    JP 213.0   3.9
 28 Lightweight           659771 Vasyl Lomachenko               UA 211.7   5.3
 29 Welterweight          766727 Vergil Ortiz Jr                US 209.5   5.9
 30 Light Welterweight    776269 Teofimo Lopez                  US 207.5   4.3
 31 Featherweight         783107 Mauricio Lara                  MX 205.5   7.7
 32 Featherweight         542148 Rey Vargas                     MX 200.2   4.9
 33 Light Welterweight    632104 Jose Carlos Ramirez            US 193.9   3.9
 34 Light Middleweight    773847 Sebastian Fundora              US 183.7   4.0
 35 Super Middleweight    545557 John Ryder                     GB 183.5   5.2
 36 Flyweight             775118 Sunny Edwards                  GB 180.0   3.8
 37 Featherweight         653034 Mark Magsayo                   PH 178.1   3.8
 38 Super Featherweight   602423 Emanuel Navarrete              MX 176.7   8.1
 39 Light Welterweight    655301 Arnold Barboza Jr              US 174.4   6.5
 40 Super Featherweight   629933 Oscar Valdez                   MX 172.0   4.7
 41 Lightweight           744388 William Zepeda Segura          MX 167.1   5.8
 42 Welterweight          691371 Cody Crowley                   CA 158.4   7.1
 43 Super Flyweight       791293 Jesse Rodriguez                US 156.5   4.6
 44 Light Middleweight    722209 Magomed Kurbanov               RU 156.2   7.8
 45 Super Middleweight    432984 Daniel Jacobs                  US 151.0   5.1
 46 Lightweight           814937 Frank Martin                   US 149.9   4.9
 47 Super Bantamweight    421916 John Riel Casimero             PH 149.3   7.2
 48 Light Middleweight    625137 Brian Carlos Castano           AR 148.8   8.1
 49 Super Bantamweight    828415 Murodjon Akhmadaliev           UZ 148.6   4.6
 50 Middleweight          588468 Chris Eubank Jr                GB 148.3   5.4

[conan_the_cribber]

=> Bivol is rated higher than Alvarez at Light Heavyweight. But Alvarez is rated at Super Middleweight, which gives him the edge from a P4P perspective. Bivol is rated higher from an absolute fighting power perspective.

Does that imply that there are multiple ratings for an individual if they are fighting, or recently fighting, at different weight classes?

3) Although I don't frequently look at the ratings any more, I have felt for some years that that the p4p ratings are skewed in favour of the heavyweights. There are six heavyweights in the top 25 fighters, which statistically speaking, is odd given there are at least 17 weight classes. Joe Joyce is rated at 15 p4p, though his biggest win is over Joseph Parker, who's biggest win was probably Ruiz, although at the time, Ruiz had beaten no-one of note. It just seems a really thin record then for Joe Joyce to be capitulated into the top 15, and I have the feeling his weight class helps him here.

=> I might change that, as the balance factor between the divisions is quite artificial. See optional P4P list in my next post.

Long term, I think that this information about balance factor needs to be posted, and probably with a justification, about how it was derived.

[conan_the_cribber]

@conan_the_cribber & all
Would you prefer a p4p list like this - the perspective is shifted towards lower weight divisions ...

Code: Select all

  1 Super Middleweight    348759 Saul Alvarez                   MX 1223    4.1
  2 Light Heavyweight     703924 Dmitrii Bivol                  RU 1004    4.5
  3 Welterweight          447121 Terence Crawford               US 997.8  20.4
  4 Bantamweight          628407 Naoya Inoue                    JP 821.6  13.9
  5 Middleweight          356831 Gennadiy Golovkin              KZ 702.9  10.5
  6 Heavyweight           479205 Tyson Fury                     GB 554.0  20.3
  7 Welterweight          629465 Errol Spence Jr                US 496.4   8.3
  8 Lightweight           790719 Shakur Stevenson               US 444.4   4.5
  9 Super Bantamweight    700183 Stephen Fulton                 US 384.9   4.5
 10 Middleweight          466535 Liam Smith                     GB 380.2   4.2
 11 Light Welterweight    611370 Regis Prograis                 US 342.1   8.0
 12 Super Featherweight   626343 O'Shaquie Foster               US 323.5   6.0
 13 Super Flyweight       467843 Juan Francisco Estrada         MX 318.8   6.6
 14 Light Welterweight    725709 Josh Taylor                    GB 313.6   4.0
 15 Light Middleweight    433135 Jermell Charlo                 US 297.7  10.5
 16 Light Heavyweight     646981 Artur Beterbiev                CA 297.4  12.2
 17 Lightweight           741718 Devin Haney                    US 281.9   4.9
 18 Lightweight           643387 Gervonta Davis                 US 278.9   7.6
 19 Lightweight           646781 George Kambosos Jr             AU 272.3   5.0
 20 Heavyweight           659772 Oleksandr Usyk                 UA 268.2   6.4
 21 Welterweight          541777 Yordenis Ugas                  CU 248.2   4.6
 22 Light Flyweight       692967 Kenshiro Teraji                JP 245.3   5.8
 23 Super Flyweight       319725 Roman Gonzalez                 NI 225.8   6.6
 24 Bantamweight           48243 Nonito Donaire                 PH 222.6   6.2
 25 Featherweight         718399 Brandon Figueroa               US 216.4   3.9
 26 Heavyweight           659461 Anthony Joshua                 GB 215.2   6.2
 27 Super Flyweight       483786 Kazuto Ioka                    JP 213.0   3.9
 28 Lightweight           659771 Vasyl Lomachenko               UA 211.7   5.3
 29 Welterweight          766727 Vergil Ortiz Jr                US 209.5   5.9
 30 Light Welterweight    776269 Teofimo Lopez                  US 207.5   4.3
 31 Featherweight         783107 Mauricio Lara                  MX 205.5   7.7
 32 Featherweight         542148 Rey Vargas                     MX 200.2   4.9
 33 Light Welterweight    632104 Jose Carlos Ramirez            US 193.9   3.9
 34 Light Middleweight    773847 Sebastian Fundora              US 183.7   4.0
 35 Super Middleweight    545557 John Ryder                     GB 183.5   5.2
 36 Flyweight             775118 Sunny Edwards                  GB 180.0   3.8
 37 Featherweight         653034 Mark Magsayo                   PH 178.1   3.8
 38 Super Featherweight   602423 Emanuel Navarrete              MX 176.7   8.1
 39 Light Welterweight    655301 Arnold Barboza Jr              US 174.4   6.5
 40 Super Featherweight   629933 Oscar Valdez                   MX 172.0   4.7
 41 Lightweight           744388 William Zepeda Segura          MX 167.1   5.8
 42 Welterweight          691371 Cody Crowley                   CA 158.4   7.1
 43 Super Flyweight       791293 Jesse Rodriguez                US 156.5   4.6
 44 Light Middleweight    722209 Magomed Kurbanov               RU 156.2   7.8
 45 Super Middleweight    432984 Daniel Jacobs                  US 151.0   5.1
 46 Lightweight           814937 Frank Martin                   US 149.9   4.9
 47 Super Bantamweight    421916 John Riel Casimero             PH 149.3   7.2
 48 Light Middleweight    625137 Brian Carlos Castano           AR 148.8   8.1
 49 Super Bantamweight    828415 Murodjon Akhmadaliev           UZ 148.6   4.6
 50 Middleweight          588468 Chris Eubank Jr                GB 148.3   5.4

This list is clearly superior to the existing list, albeit still with the noteworthy contradiction of Alvarez (a man who has fought several fights at Light Heavy) being above the man who beat him. Without more insight to the algorithm, I cannot contribute to this. I suspect however, the algorithm is forgiving for people who fight about their assigned weight class. Perhaps there is some wiggle room for establishing whether the fighter is "truly" assigned based on recent fight history. What I mean is, that if a fighter has made multiple journeys to a higher division, then he gets less of a ratings advantage than someone who is doing it for the first time.

[computerrank]

...
This list is clearly superior to the existing list, albeit still with the noteworthy contradiction of Alvarez (a man who has fought several fights at Light Heavy) being above the man who beat him. Without more insight to the algorithm, I cannot contribute to this. I suspect however, the algorithm is forgiving for people who fight about their assigned weight class. Perhaps there is some wiggle room for establishing whether the fighter is "truly" assigned based on recent fight history. What I mean is, that if a fighter has made multiple journeys to a higher division, then he gets less of a ratings advantage than someone who is doing it for the first time.

There is no contradiction with Bivol and Alvarez. It just is the decision, where to rate Alvarez. If Alvarez would be rated at Light Heavyweight, he would be rated second to Bivol there. But Alvarez is rated at Super Middleweight. And there he is rated higher than Bivol is at Light Heavyweight.

[conan_the_cribber]

...
This list is clearly superior to the existing list, albeit still with the noteworthy contradiction of Alvarez (a man who has fought several fights at Light Heavy) being above the man who beat him. Without more insight to the algorithm, I cannot contribute to this. I suspect however, the algorithm is forgiving for people who fight about their assigned weight class. Perhaps there is some wiggle room for establishing whether the fighter is "truly" assigned based on recent fight history. What I mean is, that if a fighter has made multiple journeys to a higher division, then he gets less of a ratings advantage than someone who is doing it for the first time.

There is no contradiction with Bivol and Alvarez. It just is the decision, where to rate Alvarez. If Alvarez would be rated at Light Heavyweight, he would be rated second to Bivol there. But Alvarez is rated at Super Middleweight. And there he is rated higher than Bivol is at Light Heavyweight.

Hi Martin,

I disagree strongly, there is indeed a contradiction. Not as you explain, between the numbers generated by the algorithm, which place Bivol ahead of Alvarez at Light Heavy. The contradiction is between what people would suggest as a p4p list and what the algorithm comes up with. I'm pretty sure, that if you asked 100 people who are deeply involved in the boxing industry (journalists, promoters, hardcore fans), that practically none of them would have Alvarez ahead of Bivol in their lists created by hand.

The reasoning for that is clear. Bivol beat Alvarez in a fight, and since that fight, they've both fought and beaten one good opponents. So, intuitively, there is no reason to reverse the expected order. Further factors such as Golovkin fought one weight class higher than assigned also should play a role in the "intuitive lists". I realise that intuitive lists for p4p are pretty fragile because of the impossibility of comparing fighters like Tyson Fury and Inoue because of their size/style differences and the fact that they will never meet, however, when fighters of similar weight classes do meet, and a pecking order is established, then this should be respected for some duration of time/activity.

Such a high profile contradiction at the top of the p4p list is not a good look. It reduces the credibility of the entire list, which is most likely superior to what humans can generate (at least once the heavyweight bias is taken out - Joe Joyce is another glaring error). Due to the importance of getting the top of the list right, and free of contradictions, I think we should consider what options do we have to prevent such contradictions from appearing. To do that, the algorithm needs to be published. It's hard to contribute based on incomplete information.

cheers

conan

[margaret thatcher]

more out of place than alvarez ahead of bivol is liam smith world p4p #10

but tbf it's tough to make a perfect system

[conan_the_cribber]

more out of place than alvarez ahead of bivol is liam smith world p4p #10

but tbf it's tough to make a perfect system

it is very, very hard to get right, but if you're going to try, then you have to look at what is going wrong.

[SportsRatings]

...
This list is clearly superior to the existing list, albeit still with the noteworthy contradiction of Alvarez (a man who has fought several fights at Light Heavy) being above the man who beat him. Without more insight to the algorithm, I cannot contribute to this. I suspect however, the algorithm is forgiving for people who fight about their assigned weight class. Perhaps there is some wiggle room for establishing whether the fighter is "truly" assigned based on recent fight history. What I mean is, that if a fighter has made multiple journeys to a higher division, then he gets less of a ratings advantage than someone who is doing it for the first time.

There is no contradiction with Bivol and Alvarez. It just is the decision, where to rate Alvarez. If Alvarez would be rated at Light Heavyweight, he would be rated second to Bivol there. But Alvarez is rated at Super Middleweight. And there he is rated higher than Bivol is at Light Heavyweight.

....

The reasoning for that is clear. Bivol beat Alvarez in a fight

So if John Ruiz beat Roy Jones Jr in 2003, Ruiz should be ahead of Jones on the p4p list?

[conan_the_cribber]

There is no contradiction with Bivol and Alvarez. It just is the decision, where to rate Alvarez. If Alvarez would be rated at Light Heavyweight, he would be rated second to Bivol there. But Alvarez is rated at Super Middleweight. And there he is rated higher than Bivol is at Light Heavyweight.

....

The reasoning for that is clear. Bivol beat Alvarez in a fight

So if John Ruiz beat Roy Jones Jr in 2003, Ruiz should be ahead of Jones on the p4p list?

That is in fact a legitimate question and so let's go into it.

Let's say, for arguments sake, in a fit of madness, Canelo decided to fight Tyson Fury. And naturally Fury won. Forgetting all parts of the algorithm so far, how would you react as a boxing fan when creating your p4p lists after the fight? It would depend on the outcome and nature of the fight.

• If it was a devastating early round knockout then Tyson's victory would probably mean very little to you in preparing the list. It went absolutely as expected and It would simply be a confirmation that Fury is indeed no John Ruiz. The four weight division jump was just too far for Canelo and it doesn't really affect your view of Canelo as a fighter (except that he was mad for trying).
• However If the fight was close (narrow pts win or SD), then you might drop Tury him a few spots on your list, because if he can't put away a Super Middle fighter, then perhaps he's not as good as you once thought he was. The fact that Canelo was competitive despite a four division weight jump, only confirms your believe that Canelo is a p4p monster.

So, "no" in this case, I wouldn't put Fury ahead of Canelo in any outcome scenario. Similarly, back then, I probably wouldn't have changed my p4p lists if Ruiz had won, beating a fighter jumping two weight classes for his first fight at the maximum weight class.

So what makes Canelo vs Bivol different?

• It's a one weight jump. And it's just 7lbs difference (4% of body weight).
• Canelo has already fought at that weight.
• Canelo has already won at that weight.
• Canelo has already beaten highly rated fighters at that weight.

You get where I'm going with this? Canelo has already established himself at this weight. It's a great achievement for him to do it, but, returning to the weight class above your own is simply not as dramatic as jumping for the first time from Light Heavy to Heavy as Roy Jones did. Jones jumped into a weight from 175 to 200 (or was it 190 in those days). Jones made a 10-20% jump in size, as opposed to 4% here.

If you note carefully, I have chosen factors that a rating algorithm can pick up on, not subjective factors. It's part of the goal of using the information that is in boxrec to rate p4p correctly and come up with a plausible order. I contend still, that practically no informed boxing follower, would have Canelo above Bivol right now. And if he is, then it must be by the narrowest of margins, where you could say, "yes I know Canelo lost, but his career achievements push him ahead a bit". But the current implementation has Canelo on a cloud way above all other active fighters. Bivol could win his next three fights against top fighters in his division and would probably not overtake Canelo. That simply must be wrong.

Hope that illustrates the difference in scenarios between Ruiz/Jones and Canleo/Bivol sufficiently.

[computerrank]

You are discussing about a very special p4p rating. BoxRec does not intent to provide such a special rating. A p4p rating is no factor for fair ranking boxers in divisions. It more is a philosophical matter with no clear rules.

BoxRec tries to provide valid ratings for the divisions. The BoxRec p4p rating simply is an overlay of all divisional ratings in a p4p view. So all I can do is to change the relative conversion factors between the divisions.

[conan_the_cribber]

You are discussing about a very special p4p rating. BoxRec does not intent to provide such a special rating. A p4p rating is no factor for fair ranking boxers in divisions. It more is a philosophical matter with no clear rules.

BoxRec tries to provide valid ratings for the divisions. The BoxRec p4p rating simply is an overlay of all divisional ratings in a p4p view. So all I can do is to change the relative conversion factors between the divisions.

It is indeed a philosophical question. There is a lot that could be done to produce a p4p list more in line with what boxing fanatics would expect. But that would require additional logic on top of a simple conversion factor. So the philosophical question becomes, what is the value of publishing something that you know does not live up to expectations? I think you can look with a substantial amount of pride at the divisional ratings, but not at the p4p ratings as they currently stand.

And while there is do definite guide to p4p ratings, there are some common sense considerations, which the boxrec algorithm could provide.
- it's the top level fights that define p4p, not the early career wins
- multiple top level fight victories by a fighter should usually trump a fighter with a single top level fight victory
- longevity at the top level is probably a factor
- defeating someone who had qualified for the p4p list almost certainly puts you above him, if the weight class difference is a single one.
- etc. etc. etc.

It would be a separate intellectual exercise to create such a list. But if John's not interested in investing in it, then it would remain a nice thought and that's it.

[computerrank]

It is indeed a philosophical question. There is a lot that could be done to produce a p4p list more in line with what boxing fanatics would expect. But that would require additional logic on top of a simple conversion factor. So the philosophical question becomes, what is the value of publishing something that you know does not live up to expectations? I think you can look with a substantial amount of pride at the divisional ratings, but not at the p4p ratings as they currently stand.

And while there is do definite guide to p4p ratings, there are some common sense considerations, which the boxrec algorithm could provide.
- it's the top level fights that define p4p, not the early career wins
- multiple top level fight victories by a fighter should usually trump a fighter with a single top level fight victory
- longevity at the top level is probably a factor
- defeating someone who had qualified for the p4p list almost certainly puts you above him, if the weight class difference is a single one.
- etc. etc. etc.

It would be a separate intellectual exercise to create such a list. But if John's not interested in investing in it, then it would remain a nice thought and that's it.

That sounds a lot like the current all-time ratings work, which are based on the sum of top performances measured by the opponents' p4p rank points over the whole career. The difference might be:
- add the top performances with descending weight going back in time in order to emphasize the more recent time
- add a winner above loser rule for a close division scope

[conan_the_cribber]

It is indeed a philosophical question. There is a lot that could be done to produce a p4p list more in line with what boxing fanatics would expect. But that would require additional logic on top of a simple conversion factor. So the philosophical question becomes, what is the value of publishing something that you know does not live up to expectations? I think you can look with a substantial amount of pride at the divisional ratings, but not at the p4p ratings as they currently stand.

And while there is do definite guide to p4p ratings, there are some common sense considerations, which the boxrec algorithm could provide.
- it's the top level fights that define p4p, not the early career wins
- multiple top level fight victories by a fighter should usually trump a fighter with a single top level fight victory
- longevity at the top level is probably a factor
- defeating someone who had qualified for the p4p list almost certainly puts you above him, if the weight class difference is a single one.
- etc. etc. etc.

It would be a separate intellectual exercise to create such a list. But if John's not interested in investing in it, then it would remain a nice thought and that's it.

That sounds a lot like the current all-time ratings work, which are based on the sum of top performances measured by the opponents' p4p rank points over the whole career. The difference might be:
- add the top performances with descending weight going back in time in order to emphasize the more recent time
- add a winner above loser rule for a close division scope

Well I don't know the details of the all time, but I think intuitively, there would be a lot of similarities. It's the top performances that matter. Where it differs I imagine, is that for the all-time there is no drop off over time. Whereas the current p4p list would need some sort of time-based drop off. If the key wins are more than ten years old, and the boxer is cruising with sub standard opponents, then they should be gradually descending in the p4p status.

[computerrank]

It is indeed a philosophical question. There is a lot that could be done to produce a p4p list more in line with what boxing fanatics would expect. But that would require additional logic on top of a simple conversion factor. So the philosophical question becomes, what is the value of publishing something that you know does not live up to expectations? I think you can look with a substantial amount of pride at the divisional ratings, but not at the p4p ratings as they currently stand.

And while there is do definite guide to p4p ratings, there are some common sense considerations, which the boxrec algorithm could provide.
- it's the top level fights that define p4p, not the early career wins
- multiple top level fight victories by a fighter should usually trump a fighter with a single top level fight victory
- longevity at the top level is probably a factor
- defeating someone who had qualified for the p4p list almost certainly puts you above him, if the weight class difference is a single one.
- etc. etc. etc.

It would be a separate intellectual exercise to create such a list. But if John's not interested in investing in it, then it would remain a nice thought and that's it.

That sounds a lot like the current all-time ratings work, which are based on the sum of top performances measured by the opponents' p4p rank points over the whole career. The difference might be:
- add the top performances with descending weight going back in time in order to emphasize the more recent time
- add a winner above loser rule for a close division scope

Well I don't know the details of the all time, but I think intuitively, there would be a lot of similarities. It's the top performances that matter. Where it differs I imagine, is that for the all-time there is no drop off over time. Whereas the current p4p list would need some sort of time-based drop off. If the key wins are more than ten years old, and the boxer is cruising with sub standard opponents, then they should be gradually descending in the p4p status.

That is what meant. I will compile a p4p rating derived from all-time ratings in that way ....

[conan_the_cribber]

That sounds a lot like the current all-time ratings work, which are based on the sum of top performances measured by the opponents' p4p rank points over the whole career. The difference might be:
- add the top performances with descending weight going back in time in order to emphasize the more recent time
- add a winner above loser rule for a close division scope

Well I don't know the details of the all time, but I think intuitively, there would be a lot of similarities. It's the top performances that matter. Where it differs I imagine, is that for the all-time there is no drop off over time. Whereas the current p4p list would need some sort of time-based drop off. If the key wins are more than ten years old, and the boxer is cruising with sub standard opponents, then they should be gradually descending in the p4p status.

That is what meant. I will compile a p4p rating derived from all-time ratings in that way ....

Well I'll be fascinated with the results.

[computerrank]

Well I don't know the details of the all time, but I think intuitively, there would be a lot of similarities. It's the top performances that matter. Where it differs I imagine, is that for the all-time there is no drop off over time. Whereas the current p4p list would need some sort of time-based drop off. If the key wins are more than ten years old, and the boxer is cruising with sub standard opponents, then they should be gradually descending in the p4p status.

That is what meant. I will compile a p4p rating derived from all-time ratings in that way ....

Well I'll be fascinated with the results.

Here is a first approach for such a p4p rating:

- finds the boxer's bout performances in the last 5 years
- sum of all performances in the last 2 years
- finds the best performance in the last 2 years
- sum of all performances in the 3 years before with a cap of the best performance in the last 2 years (in order devaluate descending boxers)
- winner above loser rule within the last 18 months for a division difference of at most 1 division

Code: Select all

1 	Dmitrii 	Bivol 	4644.18 	Light Heavyweight
2 	Saul 	Alvarez 	4241.99 	Super Middleweight
3 	Terence 	Crawford 	2972.75 	Welterweight
4 	Naoya 	Inoue 	2591.87 	Bantamweight
5 	Errol 	Spence Jr 	2067.47 	Welterweight
6 	Gennadiy 	Golovkin 	1963.74 	Middleweight
7 	Tyson 	Fury 	1742.61 	Heavyweight
8 	Juan Francisco 	Estrada 	1450.67 	Super Flyweight
9 	Gervonta 	Davis 	1422.15 	Lightweight
10 	Josh 	Taylor 	1293.03 	Light Welterweight
11 	Vasyl 	Lomachenko 	1284.68 	Lightweight
12 	Shakur 	Stevenson 	1274.46 	Lightweight
13 	Regis 	Prograis 	1211.58 	Light Welterweight
14 	Devin 	Haney 	1206.97 	Lightweight
15 	Emanuel 	Navarrete 	1048.56 	Super Featherweight
16 	Artur 	Beterbiev 	1025.76 	Light Heavyweight
17 	Oleksandr 	Usyk 	1023.61 	Heavyweight
18 	Jose Carlos 	Ramirez 	1008.48 	Light Welterweight
19 	Roman 	Gonzalez 	951.716 	Super Flyweight
20 	Yordenis 	Ugas 	951.679 	Welterweight
21 	Stephen 	Fulton 	948.498 	Super Bantamweight
22 	Anthony 	Joshua 	940.331 	Heavyweight
23 	Kazuto 	Ioka 	878.193 	Super Flyweight
24 	George 	Kambosos Jr 	802.504 	Lightweight
25 	Liam 	Smith 	801.601 	Middleweight
26 	Jermell 	Charlo 	789.066 	Light Middleweight
27 	Josh 	Warrington 	770.261 	Featherweight
28 	O'Shaquie 	Foster 	764.437 	Super Featherweight
29 	Teofimo 	Lopez 	736.57 	Light Welterweight
30 	Kenshiro 	Teraji 	733.801 	Light Flyweight
31 	Nonito 	Donaire 	696.253 	Bantamweight
32 	Brandon 	Figueroa 	688.623 	Featherweight
33 	Arnold 	Barboza Jr 	664.964 	Light Welterweight
34 	Rey 	Vargas 	634.068 	Featherweight
35 	Jaime 	Munguia 	623.558 	Middleweight
36 	Jaron 	Ennis 	616.043 	Welterweight
37 	Tim 	Tszyu 	579.479 	Light Middleweight
38 	Vergil 	Ortiz Jr 	567.111 	Welterweight
39 	Oscar 	Valdez 	555.448 	Super Featherweight
40 	Sunny 	Edwards 	555.18 	Flyweight
41 	Jose 	Pedraza 	550.834 	Light Welterweight
42 	Isaac 	Dogboe 	550.748 	Featherweight
43 	John Riel 	Casimero 	539.512 	Super Bantamweight
44 	Murodjon 	Akhmadaliev 	521.315 	Super Bantamweight
45 	Sebastian 	Fundora 	509.14 	Light Middleweight
46 	Shavkatdzhon 	Rakhimov 	507.485 	Super Featherweight
47 	Chris 	Eubank Jr 	472.919 	Middleweight
48 	Kosei 	Tanaka 	464.55 	Super Flyweight
49 	Isaac 	Cruz 	457.158 	Lightweight
50 	Fernando Daniel 	Martinez 	439.778 	Super Flyweight
51 	Mark 	Magsayo 	439.543 	Featherweight
52 	Joshua 	Franco 	436.614 	Super Flyweight
53 	John 	Ryder 	434.046 	Super Middleweight
54 	William 	Zepeda Segura 	433.758 	Lightweight
55 	Brian Carlos 	Castano 	425.353 	Light Middleweight
56 	Junto 	Nakatani 	424.211 	Super Flyweight
57 	Dillian 	Whyte 	424.033 	Heavyweight
58 	Demetrius 	Andrade 	420.992 	Super Middleweight
59 	David 	Avanesyan 	420.624 	Welterweight
60 	Joseph 	Diaz 	420.144 	Lightweight
61 	Callum 	Smith 	417.836 	Light Heavyweight
62 	Ryan 	Garcia 	417.253 	Light Welterweight
63 	Luis 	Nery 	413.286 	Super Bantamweight
64 	Jason 	Moloney 	394.605 	Bantamweight
65 	Magomed 	Kurbanov 	376.561 	Light Middleweight
66 	Masamichi 	Yabuki 	375.823 	Light Flyweight
67 	Leigh 	Wood 	371.311 	Featherweight
68 	Sandor 	Martin 	363.404 	Light Welterweight
69 	Gilberto 	Ramirez 	361.765 	Light Heavyweight
70 	David 	Benavidez 	360.311 	Super Middleweight
71 	Cody 	Crowley 	352.901 	Welterweight
72 	Luis Alberto 	Lopez 	351.097 	Featherweight
73 	Emmanuel 	Rodriguez 	345.733 	Bantamweight
74 	Jack 	Catterall 	344.617 	Light Welterweight
75 	Andrew 	Moloney 	339.775 	Super Flyweight
76 	Ra'eese 	Aleem 	336.358 	Super Bantamweight
77 	Jamaine 	Ortiz 	333.699 	Lightweight
78 	Shuichiro 	Yoshino 	333.289 	Lightweight
79 	Joet 	Gonzalez 	328.943 	Featherweight
80 	Reiya 	Abe 	311.071 	Featherweight
81 	Andy 	Ruiz 	307.789 	Heavyweight
82 	Kid 	Galahad 	306.848 	Lightweight
83 	Thammanoon 	Niyomtrong 	299.264 	Minimumweight
84 	Carlos 	Castro 	293.391 	Super Bantamweight
85 	Lawrence 	Okolie 	292.483 	Cruiserweight
86 	Panya 	Pradabsri 	290.733 	Minimumweight
87 	Danny 	Garcia 	290.009 	Light Middleweight
88 	Jesse 	Rodriguez 	287.68 	Super Flyweight
89 	Joe 	Cordina 	286.412 	Super Featherweight
90 	Sergiy 	Derevyanchenko 	285.611 	Middleweight
91 	Gary Antuanne 	Russell 	285.304 	Light Welterweight
92 	Israil 	Madrimov 	282.986 	Light Middleweight
93 	Frank 	Martin 	282.909 	Lightweight
94 	Conor 	Benn 	280.85 	Welterweight
95 	Michel 	Rivera 	279.877 	Lightweight
96 	Joe 	Joyce 	274.649 	Heavyweight
97 	Carlos 	Adames 	272.451 	Middleweight
98 	Souleymane 	Cissokho 	270.849 	Welterweight
99 	Eimantas 	Stanionis 	270.457 	Welterweight
100 	Hiroto 	Kyoguchi 	266.271 	Light Flyweight

[conan_the_cribber]

That is what meant. I will compile a p4p rating derived from all-time ratings in that way ....

Well I'll be fascinated with the results.

Here is a first approach for such a p4p rating:

- finds the boxer's bout performances in the last 5 years
- sum of all performances in the last 2 years
- finds the best performance in the last 2 years
- sum of all performances in the 3 years before with a cap of the best performance in the last 2 years (in order devaluate descending boxers)
- winner above loser rule within the last 18 months for a division difference of at most 1 division

Code: Select all

1 	Dmitrii 	Bivol 	4644.18 	Light Heavyweight
2 	Saul 	Alvarez 	4241.99 	Super Middleweight
3 	Terence 	Crawford 	2972.75 	Welterweight
4 	Naoya 	Inoue 	2591.87 	Bantamweight
5 	Errol 	Spence Jr 	2067.47 	Welterweight
6 	Gennadiy 	Golovkin 	1963.74 	Middleweight
7 	Tyson 	Fury 	1742.61 	Heavyweight
8 	Juan Francisco 	Estrada 	1450.67 	Super Flyweight
9 	Gervonta 	Davis 	1422.15 	Lightweight
10 	Josh 	Taylor 	1293.03 	Light Welterweight
11 	Vasyl 	Lomachenko 	1284.68 	Lightweight
12 	Shakur 	Stevenson 	1274.46 	Lightweight
13 	Regis 	Prograis 	1211.58 	Light Welterweight
14 	Devin 	Haney 	1206.97 	Lightweight
15 	Emanuel 	Navarrete 	1048.56 	Super Featherweight
16 	Artur 	Beterbiev 	1025.76 	Light Heavyweight
17 	Oleksandr 	Usyk 	1023.61 	Heavyweight
18 	Jose Carlos 	Ramirez 	1008.48 	Light Welterweight
19 	Roman 	Gonzalez 	951.716 	Super Flyweight
20 	Yordenis 	Ugas 	951.679 	Welterweight
21 	Stephen 	Fulton 	948.498 	Super Bantamweight
22 	Anthony 	Joshua 	940.331 	Heavyweight
23 	Kazuto 	Ioka 	878.193 	Super Flyweight
24 	George 	Kambosos Jr 	802.504 	Lightweight
25 	Liam 	Smith 	801.601 	Middleweight
26 	Jermell 	Charlo 	789.066 	Light Middleweight
27 	Josh 	Warrington 	770.261 	Featherweight
28 	O'Shaquie 	Foster 	764.437 	Super Featherweight
29 	Teofimo 	Lopez 	736.57 	Light Welterweight
30 	Kenshiro 	Teraji 	733.801 	Light Flyweight
31 	Nonito 	Donaire 	696.253 	Bantamweight
32 	Brandon 	Figueroa 	688.623 	Featherweight
33 	Arnold 	Barboza Jr 	664.964 	Light Welterweight
34 	Rey 	Vargas 	634.068 	Featherweight
35 	Jaime 	Munguia 	623.558 	Middleweight
36 	Jaron 	Ennis 	616.043 	Welterweight
37 	Tim 	Tszyu 	579.479 	Light Middleweight
38 	Vergil 	Ortiz Jr 	567.111 	Welterweight
39 	Oscar 	Valdez 	555.448 	Super Featherweight
40 	Sunny 	Edwards 	555.18 	Flyweight
41 	Jose 	Pedraza 	550.834 	Light Welterweight
42 	Isaac 	Dogboe 	550.748 	Featherweight
43 	John Riel 	Casimero 	539.512 	Super Bantamweight
44 	Murodjon 	Akhmadaliev 	521.315 	Super Bantamweight
45 	Sebastian 	Fundora 	509.14 	Light Middleweight
46 	Shavkatdzhon 	Rakhimov 	507.485 	Super Featherweight
47 	Chris 	Eubank Jr 	472.919 	Middleweight
48 	Kosei 	Tanaka 	464.55 	Super Flyweight
49 	Isaac 	Cruz 	457.158 	Lightweight
50 	Fernando Daniel 	Martinez 	439.778 	Super Flyweight
51 	Mark 	Magsayo 	439.543 	Featherweight
52 	Joshua 	Franco 	436.614 	Super Flyweight
53 	John 	Ryder 	434.046 	Super Middleweight
54 	William 	Zepeda Segura 	433.758 	Lightweight
55 	Brian Carlos 	Castano 	425.353 	Light Middleweight
56 	Junto 	Nakatani 	424.211 	Super Flyweight
57 	Dillian 	Whyte 	424.033 	Heavyweight
58 	Demetrius 	Andrade 	420.992 	Super Middleweight
59 	David 	Avanesyan 	420.624 	Welterweight
60 	Joseph 	Diaz 	420.144 	Lightweight
61 	Callum 	Smith 	417.836 	Light Heavyweight
62 	Ryan 	Garcia 	417.253 	Light Welterweight
63 	Luis 	Nery 	413.286 	Super Bantamweight
64 	Jason 	Moloney 	394.605 	Bantamweight
65 	Magomed 	Kurbanov 	376.561 	Light Middleweight
66 	Masamichi 	Yabuki 	375.823 	Light Flyweight
67 	Leigh 	Wood 	371.311 	Featherweight
68 	Sandor 	Martin 	363.404 	Light Welterweight
69 	Gilberto 	Ramirez 	361.765 	Light Heavyweight
70 	David 	Benavidez 	360.311 	Super Middleweight
71 	Cody 	Crowley 	352.901 	Welterweight
72 	Luis Alberto 	Lopez 	351.097 	Featherweight
73 	Emmanuel 	Rodriguez 	345.733 	Bantamweight
74 	Jack 	Catterall 	344.617 	Light Welterweight
75 	Andrew 	Moloney 	339.775 	Super Flyweight
76 	Ra'eese 	Aleem 	336.358 	Super Bantamweight
77 	Jamaine 	Ortiz 	333.699 	Lightweight
78 	Shuichiro 	Yoshino 	333.289 	Lightweight
79 	Joet 	Gonzalez 	328.943 	Featherweight
80 	Reiya 	Abe 	311.071 	Featherweight
81 	Andy 	Ruiz 	307.789 	Heavyweight
82 	Kid 	Galahad 	306.848 	Lightweight
83 	Thammanoon 	Niyomtrong 	299.264 	Minimumweight
84 	Carlos 	Castro 	293.391 	Super Bantamweight
85 	Lawrence 	Okolie 	292.483 	Cruiserweight
86 	Panya 	Pradabsri 	290.733 	Minimumweight
87 	Danny 	Garcia 	290.009 	Light Middleweight
88 	Jesse 	Rodriguez 	287.68 	Super Flyweight
89 	Joe 	Cordina 	286.412 	Super Featherweight
90 	Sergiy 	Derevyanchenko 	285.611 	Middleweight
91 	Gary Antuanne 	Russell 	285.304 	Light Welterweight
92 	Israil 	Madrimov 	282.986 	Light Middleweight
93 	Frank 	Martin 	282.909 	Lightweight
94 	Conor 	Benn 	280.85 	Welterweight
95 	Michel 	Rivera 	279.877 	Lightweight
96 	Joe 	Joyce 	274.649 	Heavyweight
97 	Carlos 	Adames 	272.451 	Middleweight
98 	Souleymane 	Cissokho 	270.849 	Welterweight
99 	Eimantas 	Stanionis 	270.457 	Welterweight
100 	Hiroto 	Kyoguchi 	266.271 	Light Flyweight

Well Martin, it's like this.

1) Generally it's an improvement.

2) It still requires some tuning and in my opinion is not yet publishable. In particular the Lightweights don't work out. Without knowing the numbers, I'm pretty sure Lomachenko was at one point one of the top p4p fighters. However, the man that beat him, or the fighter that beat the man who beat the man, do not appear in the p4p ratings above him. Also, the ratings contradict the lightweight divisional ratings.

3) However, my main complaint is you "going it alone" for this first attempt. I assume I'm not the only one who's put up their name as someone willing to help in the ratings. I assume JCS and others are on board. I think it would be better to work as a team, thereby saving yourself less iterations of programming.

I will now answer the criteria bit that you've chosen. I encourage you to seek further input from the other enthusiasts before having another go.

cheers

conan

[conan_the_cribber]

Here is a first approach for such a p4p rating:

a) finds the boxer's bout performances in the last 5 years
b) sum of all performances in the last 2 years
c) finds the best performance in the last 2 years
d) sum of all performances in the 3 years before with a cap of the best performance in the last 2 years (in order devaluate descending boxers)
e) winner above loser rule within the last 18 months for a division difference of at most 1 division

Firstly, it's a rough draft, I understand that. But as someone who in real life designs the biggest computing systems in Europe, I think you need to work on your specification skills. It is not possible from the description above to know how points a) through e) combine to generate the number you came up with.

So going back to the drawing board for a second, tell me what's going wrong with the normal divisional ratings? If you're satisfied with them, then I'm surprised that they don't suffice for a p4p rating. However you did mention, that there is some divisional scaling (where you made an adjustment and sent the results to me recently). Does that mean the higher weight divisions require scaling down? How did you determine that? My guess is it's a side of effect of your desire for a predictability validated ratings system (our old dispute). Bigger fighters defeat smaller fighters disproportionally, I'm assuming that this is something that the underlying mathematical model does not account for. I ask you this, because in points a) b) c) and d) above you use this rating (I assume in an unfiltered way).

Secondly, I would like to think about the problem domain. What are we trying to automate here? Here are some rough domain thoughts.

1) Marquis fighters, those who's name comes up in p4p discussions, generally fight about twice a year these days.
2) Marquis fighters are near the top of their divisional ratings.
3) A division may have multiple Marquis fighters (Aj, Fury, Wilder OR Canelo Golovkin).
4) These Marquis fighters may not have met yet.
5) When two Marquis fighters in a division meet, and there is a result for one of these fighters, then immediately after the fight, the winner should ALWAYS be rated above the loser in the p4p ratings.
6) What should be the criteria for invalidating this direct result in point 5)? Well I guess it's either
6a) a truly stellar achievement by the direct result loser in a higher weight class. If Tarver beat Jones, then Tarver should be p4p higher. If Jones fought anyone in his division and won in his next fight, then Tarver should still ALWAYS be above Jones still. However, if in his next fight, Jones jumped two divisions and fought Ruiz and won, then I could make an argument that Jones is ahead of Tarver on the p4p basis because Tarver has yet to achieve such a feat. My gut feeling is Marquis fights in a higher weight division than normal, should be weighted more in p4p calculations.
6b) A very long time. Given the fight frequency, I think if both fighters are avoiding each other, yet both are still competing in similar divisions (max one weight class apart), then the direct result should stand. I think it's fair to say, that whatever Golovkin achieved in his own weight division in the four years since he fought Canelo in 2018, no-one would rank him above Canelo because Canelo did not lose in that time. So I would suggest that the 18 months offered above is too short for p4p.
6c) A very bad loss for the winner. Boxing is a cruel sport. So many boxers reach a point where they just get old. Should the winner have a loss against a weak opponent, then it's fair to say, that they're not a p4p prospect any more. So I'm thinking, that in addition to points a) through e) above, the nature of the losses also need to be accounted for.
7) In general beating someone on the p4p list, does not mean you inherit their spot. It is not a ladder competition. When Andy Ruiz beat AJ, he should not have been #1 on anyone's heavyweight list, as the fight only proved that a) Ruiz was better than AJ and b) that AJ was weaker than people previously thought and probably behind Tury and Wilder (none of the three having fought each other at the time).
8) The nature of the result should probably influence the p4p status. KO wins weigh more than PTS win, and a lopsided PTS win is worth more than a close PTS win or SD.
9) No-one should be considered for the p4p ratings who has not fought another Marquis fighter. Compiling a 40-0 record like Brian Nielson did in the 90s, should be worth nothing. I'm assuming the divisional ratings take care of this.
10) A fighter who has proven themselves superior in multiple Marquis fights should probably be rated above people with a single Marquis win.


Any further domain comments from enthusiasts? Once the domain is sort of specified we can deduce factors that are implementable.