Is there any oversight for preventing or fixing troll scoring on this site? This could be (if not already is, I'm not sure) a problem of validity moving forward, especially if the suggestion of using said fan scores for training judges becomes a reality
Scoring is also tracked on the site, a.k.a. “Judging the judges.” The site features options for round scoring, which can be used to train judges, as well as the public and also post event reporting and analytics.
computerrank wrote: ↑03 Dec 2021, 20:40
Regarding Bridgerweight and Forrest. It isn't a ratings issue - it is politics. Just look at his points in his record. The points are Heavyweight points.
Could you expand on the political problem to help us understand? Is it that you would offend the WBC by calling their Bridgerweight top contenders mostly heavyweight fringe contenders and journeymen? And if so, do they really react any better to de-ranking those same fighters entirely?
Or is it that you're trying to stick it to the WBC so as to encourage them to drop the experiment?
If it's the latter, I guess I would acknowledge it's a noble goal, but the cost in terms of confusion for people who just want a rock-solid set of rankings to look at seems a bit steep to me.
Can the site not just decide to rise above and/or ignore the WBC politics and get those fighters back in the ratings mix where they objectively belong?
Posted on the wrong forum while this one was down, but thought it was worth exploring here.
As someone who works on the TV side for FOX and NBC Sports with research being a key point, have a suggestion I would love to see on BoxRec. I spend WAY too much time on this site!
Ask commissions to submit scorecards for all fights, even ones that end in KO. From a research perspective, I've started building more in-depth profiles and have requested scores from commissions from old fights with good results depending on the commission. But moving forward would be awesome to see commissions forced to give us more info rather than the bare minimum! I wanna know how many rounds a guy won on the cards before a KO. Especially in the UK they don't seem to disclose that information and you get a lot of incomplete data -- fights like Jay Harris vs. Ricardo Sandoval, Lewis Ritson vs. Jeremiah Ponce, etc. I wanna know where the judges had it when the fight came to an end.
Would it be possible to have an option to view "amateur only" or "professional only" last 6 decisions on the Watchlist. I think it make the Watchlist cleaner and easier/quicker to review. For example, I have 200 boxers I follow and it would be great to quickly scan down and see if any has lost in the last pro fight without confusing it with an amateur loss from years ago.
Greetings ... It would be nice to see the history of boxing through the Boxrec algorithm. Enter the day, the month and the year that we want, and Boxrec shows us who the rating would look like, the recent fights, the champions of that moment, etc.
Browse all boxrec with the data of the date we want to explore. It would be great for boxing if something like this existed
the Ratings have always been a point of contention, in the past the scoring systems always had Huge Gaps between Fighters, including at the Top, now (generally speaking), most fighters are inaccurately low, even among Top Fighters.
there has always been far, far too many fighters really unaccounted for. I mean there are thousands of fighters on the data base and literally hundreds of them are great and excellent Top Noted fighters. So surely there is a better way of accounting for ALL these Fighters, in that 'their' Careers, long or short, prolific or just a few fights, but irrespective they are properly credited and Boxing History is better Served because of it.
Can a System, like the one below, not give a more realistic & balanced Scoring & Ranking to ALL Fighters, with ALL of their Fights Credited in Merit, Status and Title?
CAREER POINTS - Scoring/Ratings Template...
Wins - 2 Points
Draws - 1 point
Losses - 0
COUNTRY Titles
National Eliminators Loses - 3 points
National Eliminators Wins - 5 points
National Titles Loses - 10 points
National Titles Wins - 15 points
REGIONAL Titles - British, European. Asian Pacific, etc...
ABC's Alphabet Titles (no better than Regional Titles, in many cases.
Alphabet Title Eliminators Loses- 40 points
Alphabet Title Eliminators Wins- 45 points
Alphabet Title Loses - 45 points
Alphabet Title Wins - 50 points
Lineal Title
Lineal Eliminators Loses - 75 points
Lineal Title Eliminators WINS - 100 points
Lineal World Title Loses - 125 points
Lineal World Title WINS - 200 points
Additional Points,
10 points for over 50 Fights,
15 points for over 75 Fights
20 points for over 100 Fights,
25 points for over 125 Fights
30 points for over 150 Fights
35 points for over 175 Fights
40 points for over 200 Fights
50 points for MORE 225 Fights - Stops here (if you wish), because Most of the FIGHTS are ALL accounted for - Wins, Draw Loss Scoring & Title Related FIGHTS.
it would bring all Fighters into mix, so to speak,
and the ridiculously wide gaps would only be seen by fighters who had fairly inactive, unproductive and/or short careers, where as the Thousand of 'worthy' Fighters would be recognised & complimented more realistically.
Strongly disagree with your idea. You're basing a significant portion of what separates one fighter from another (especially at a mid-level) on winning title fights. First, I think it's nonsensical to base someone's objective value on something as subjective as even a high-level alphabet title. But then you get into regional and national titles. Most countries don't have national titles recognized by Boxrec, if any at all. And for those that do, many like to stage national title fights against some super mediocre fighter who couldn't even make it on TV as a B-side in a decent boxing country, and they'll pit him against some 2-5 fighter. So let's say you're some 2-5 guy who fights for the Bolivian title and loses to some guy who legitimately doesn't belong in the top 200....you get 10 points for that?
But only 1 point for beating a top prospect in a fight with no silly title at stake?
Not to mention the difficulty and disagreement involved with putting Boxrec in charge of determining who actually has a lineal title and who doesn't. Plus there's no such thing as a lineal title eliminator.
Here's a scenario to consider: Zsolt Erdei had the lineal title at one point. Fought a bunch of dregs. Roy Jones was an alphabet titlist at the time, despite being considered the best, by far, Erdei notwithstanding. So let's say Erdei fights my friend George Blades. A great guy, but also a journeyman. George Blades gets 125 points for losing a lineal title fight he didn't deserve to contest in the first place? Meanwhile, Jones can beat the 2nd-best fighter in the division in an alphabet title fight (let alone if he decides to not pay a sanctioning fee), and he only gets 50???
Your ratings would be random as all get-out, and perhaps even worse, they would further encourage promotors to fabricate meaningless titles.
margaret thatcher wrote: ↑04 Dec 2021, 16:47
all guys ranked as bridgers by wbc should be rated as hws here, my opinion
FYI Bilal Laggoune is no longer ranked at Bridger. Should he not be back in the rankings now at cruiser? Ditto for Isaac Chamberlain. Jerry Forrest is also out of the rankings, so he should be back at HW, along with Alexander Frank
Though obviously I continue to strongly agree with margaret thatcher that they should be ranked in their appropriate real division, rather than arbitrarily excluded in the first place.
when i person is on a page in the database, and clicks another page and is forced to log in, take them to the page they were going, not back to the homepage
ko rate is determined using wins and losses pretty much everywhere i've seen, looking at the full record will give more context to whether they are a puncher or not
Manrae wrote: ↑17 Nov 2021, 01:51
Is there any oversight for preventing or fixing troll scoring on this site? This could be (if not already is, I'm not sure) a problem of validity moving forward, especially if the suggestion of using said fan scores for training judges becomes a reality
Good point.
Same time, I'm a fan and have been expressing my opinions for years on here.
Who do you speak of ?
We have had thread after thread on all of the controversial decisions and wrongdoings at some point.
Greetings... I can see in chronological order all the world title fights of each of the divisions in each organization. And the fights before 1962? Could you add them?
2 suggestions, maybe you like them. Add these options: 1-In each timeline of each division could you mix the 4 organisms? 2- Mix all the divisions of all the organizations in a single link?
As someone who works on the TV side for FOX and NBC Sports with research being a key point, have a suggestion I would love to see on BoxRec. I spend WAY too much time on this site!
Ask commissions to submit scorecards for all fights, even ones that end in KO. From a research perspective, I've started building more in-depth profiles and have requested scores from commissions from old fights with good results depending on the commission. But moving forward would be awesome to see commissions forced to give us more info rather than the bare minimum! I wanna know how many rounds a guy won on the cards before a KO. Especially in the UK they don't seem to disclose that information and you get a lot of incomplete data -- fights like Jay Harris vs. Ricardo Sandoval, Lewis Ritson vs. Jeremiah Ponce, etc. I wanna know where the judges had it when the fight came to an end.
You need a like button! Couldn’t agree more with ‘Dynamic Hispanic’ here
Dan O'Malley here. Please put my fight w/Buster Douglas back on my and his record. I was paid $200 to fight him. Yes, I had a headgear on. Why ? Because I had a cut over my eye and was the only guy within 200 miles who was willing to fight him. His original opponent did not show up. The boxing commission sanctioned it, his Dad turned the fight in to the Ring Record Book and it stood for 39 or so years. It's all I have left to share with my grand kids. Thanks. PS. Thers an article about the fight in Bert Sugars Boxing Illustrated.
hulkmaniac wrote: ↑03 Mar 2022, 05:48
Why do the boxer profiles no longer show the date of birth?
data protection concerns
How about including the month + year? Someone born in January vs December of the same year, is almost a year older.
Thats for the admin of the site to agree on, I guess it depends on whether the software allows that? Personally I don't really see the issue showing the date of birth in full as more often than not you can find it on other websites
After the competition for the WKR boxing belt, how can we add the results of the event? It was on the 27th of last month I want to know how to pay the fees for the first time. We are the organization of the World Council for Martial Arts WKR organizing events since 2020 because we have not registered professional matches yet. We want to know how to register
