BoxRec

computerrank wrote: ↑01 Dec 2023, 09:50 My last approach to handle the Fury - Ngannou ranking problem resulted in building a pronouced ranking ladder system.

Now I found a more sophisticated approach by keeping a standard number of 3 prior bouts for all boxers with at least 6 career bouts. And working with a reduced number o prior bouts only for boxers with less career bouts. 0.5 prior bouts for a boxer with 1 career bout, 1 prior bout for a boxer with 2 career bouts ... 3 prior bouts for boxers with 6 or more career bouts.

This even improves the resulting winner prediction ratio from 85.67 to 85.84 percent!

And it doesn't really touch the ratings of boxers with 6 and more career bouts. Only boxers with less career bouts are more tied now to the rankings of their opponents than to virtual prior opponents. Especially boxers after their first bout are rated closer to their opponent.

Ngannou would be rated at #28 after his SD loss to Fury.

I will propose that solution for the live system now.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑05 Dec 2023, 19:11 check out the ratings thread for discussion on ngannou and the formula changes that led to his increase

viewtopic.php?t=249171&start=400

this was the most recent change i think

computerrank wrote: ↑01 Dec 2023, 09:50 My last approach to handle the Fury - Ngannou ranking problem resulted in building a pronouced ranking ladder system.

Now I found a more sophisticated approach by keeping a standard number of 3 prior bouts for all boxers with at least 6 career bouts. And working with a reduced number o prior bouts only for boxers with less career bouts. 0.5 prior bouts for a boxer with 1 career bout, 1 prior bout for a boxer with 2 career bouts ... 3 prior bouts for boxers with 6 or more career bouts.

This even improves the resulting winner prediction ratio from 85.67 to 85.84 percent!

And it doesn't really touch the ratings of boxers with 6 and more career bouts. Only boxers with less career bouts are more tied now to the rankings of their opponents than to virtual prior opponents. Especially boxers after their first bout are rated closer to their opponent.

Ngannou would be rated at #28 after his SD loss to Fury.

I will propose that solution for the live system now.

Finkel wrote: ↑05 Dec 2023, 20:58

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑05 Dec 2023, 19:11 check out the ratings thread for discussion on ngannou and the formula changes that led to his increase

viewtopic.php?t=249171&start=400

this was the most recent change i think

computerrank wrote: ↑01 Dec 2023, 09:50 My last approach to handle the Fury - Ngannou ranking problem resulted in building a pronouced ranking ladder system.

Now I found a more sophisticated approach by keeping a standard number of 3 prior bouts for all boxers with at least 6 career bouts. And working with a reduced number o prior bouts only for boxers with less career bouts. 0.5 prior bouts for a boxer with 1 career bout, 1 prior bout for a boxer with 2 career bouts ... 3 prior bouts for boxers with 6 or more career bouts.

This even improves the resulting winner prediction ratio from 85.67 to 85.84 percent!

And it doesn't really touch the ratings of boxers with 6 and more career bouts. Only boxers with less career bouts are more tied now to the rankings of their opponents than to virtual prior opponents. Especially boxers after their first bout are rated closer to their opponent.

Ngannou would be rated at #28 after his SD loss to Fury.

I will propose that solution for the live system now.

That reads like one man (who keeps) fiddling the rankings to get the desired outcome (of someone with a brown envelope)

Their whole rankings have been a mess since at least the major overhaul in 2020. Each time they fiddle with it they get worse and worse. But hey, it keeps Brick Top happy.
Dubois at #4
Chisora previously at #6 pre Fury fight
Now, Ngannou at #25 post Fury fight


As I suggest in my OP, it looks like they have completely sold out. We already have rankings for cash with the orgs (Brcik Top, WBO, cough cough). So what's the point in having boxrec?

gilgamesh wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 15:42 To me it's not crazy to rank a guy in the Top 30 when he holds the Heavyweight Champion of the World to a Split Decision and knocks him down.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 15:42 To me it's not crazy to rank a guy in the Top 30 when he holds the Heavyweight Champion of the World to a Split Decision and knocks him down.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 18:36 well tbf his ranking now is still based on the result, it's just interpreted differently. although also tbf it seems the recent change in ranking formula was based on the subjective view that his previous ranking was too low....

it's a very weird situation. it should matter that he has next to no boxing results, but it should also matter that he dropped and ran very close vs the arguable world #1 at the time. very few others have a comparable effort, and those guys in the #500 range that fran was previously at are universes away from that. i think you could feasibly put fran at many different spots in the top 25-100 range

Finkel wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 21:44

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 18:36 well tbf his ranking now is still based on the result, it's just interpreted differently. although also tbf it seems the recent change in ranking formula was based on the subjective view that his previous ranking was too low....

it's a very weird situation. it should matter that he has next to no boxing results, but it should also matter that he dropped and ran very close vs the arguable world #1 at the time. very few others have a comparable effort, and those guys in the #500 range that fran was previously at are universes away from that. i think you could feasibly put fran at many different spots in the top 25-100 range

Well, you are kind of arguing for objective rating to include subjectivity there. But, I agree it is certainly "interpreted differently", It must be the same "different" interpretation that has a fighter at #4 because he scored a non-KD (officially a foul) and got stopped off a jab against the Boxrec champion.

For me the underlying problem is what Boxrec presents itself as.
We have our own subjective community ranking system. Ngannou made it into the top 15 with less than a quarter of the voters. Fine, I don't agree with it, but it is the system that is in place, and I'm not the dictator of our community rankings. But to my knowledge, BoxRec isn't meant to have a dictator with his finger on the balance either.
This is the promise made by BoxRec on their website: ©BoxRec is the official record keeper for 410 sports authorities worldwide, it is not under direct control of any single authority. That is what most fans think of when they hear the Brand Boxrec: an organization whose main goal is to maintain boxer's resumes.
Given that is the case, what assumption are the general public making when they read their rankings? That they are an objective (or even subjective) ranking based purely on resume? Or they are another ranking system that includes factors such as "the eye test", "in ring performance", "popularity" - basically The Ring.

I argued this with ComputerRank a few years back. He doesn't see the problem with it (so be it). However, I think it is incongruent with the very thing BoxRec is advertising itself as being, to have this kind of Rankings for Sale system. (I mean look at the state of the current top 10, then consider who those rankings benefit - I can break it down, but it should be bloody obvious what is going on).

Personally, I think they have completely sold out.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 22:25

Finkel wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 21:44

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 18:36 well tbf his ranking now is still based on the result, it's just interpreted differently. although also tbf it seems the recent change in ranking formula was based on the subjective view that his previous ranking was too low....

it's a very weird situation. it should matter that he has next to no boxing results, but it should also matter that he dropped and ran very close vs the arguable world #1 at the time. very few others have a comparable effort, and those guys in the #500 range that fran was previously at are universes away from that. i think you could feasibly put fran at many different spots in the top 25-100 range

Well, you are kind of arguing for objective rating to include subjectivity there. But, I agree it is certainly "interpreted differently", It must be the same "different" interpretation that has a fighter at #4 because he scored a non-KD (officially a foul) and got stopped off a jab against the Boxrec champion.

For me the underlying problem is what Boxrec presents itself as.
We have our own subjective community ranking system. Ngannou made it into the top 15 with less than a quarter of the voters. Fine, I don't agree with it, but it is the system that is in place, and I'm not the dictator of our community rankings. But to my knowledge, BoxRec isn't meant to have a dictator with his finger on the balance either.
This is the promise made by BoxRec on their website: ©BoxRec is the official record keeper for 410 sports authorities worldwide, it is not under direct control of any single authority. That is what most fans think of when they hear the Brand Boxrec: an organization whose main goal is to maintain boxer's resumes.
Given that is the case, what assumption are the general public making when they read their rankings? That they are an objective (or even subjective) ranking based purely on resume? Or they are another ranking system that includes factors such as "the eye test", "in ring performance", "popularity" - basically The Ring.

I argued this with ComputerRank a few years back. He doesn't see the problem with it (so be it). However, I think it is incongruent with the very thing BoxRec is advertising itself as being, to have this kind of Rankings for Sale system. (I mean look at the state of the current top 10, then consider who those rankings benefit - I can break it down, but it should be bloody obvious what is going on).

Personally, I think they have completely sold out.

there is no way to completely exclude subjectivity. certain values must be decided on an input into the system to make it run

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 22:35 that's my just take on where i think ngannou should or at least can feasibly be rated. i can then compare this to where boxrec has him to get a sense of how similar our rankings are, but it's not me trying to build the inputs for a computerized system. although that said, 'close fight' and world #1 are things that can be made concrete - .e.g a split dec could count as a close fight in someone'es ranking system. a system could have had fury with more points than anyone else. a fighter may not have a win, draw, or any close loss vs someone with anywhere near that many points, etc.

you simply cant get rid of all subjective elements. your own criticisms of the system are riddled with subjectivity too and seem heavily based on your own personal disagreement with them

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 22:48 lol is that a serious question? you make all sorts of subjective assessments and assumptions. for one that the rankings are for sale

loads of others in different ranking threads about fighters ability level and the worth of their resumes

there's really no way to be completely objective either tbf

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 22:54 well there you go, some big assumptions!

Jeff_lacy_ko wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 17:19 The top 10 in a division is pretty easy for just a fan to do. Making algorithms that spits out nutty results is funny though - ITS OBJECTIVE says they guy fiddling with the numbers to produce the results

joshj909 wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 18:23

gilgamesh wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 15:42 To me it's not crazy to rank a guy in the Top 30 when he holds the Heavyweight Champion of the World to a Split Decision and knocks him down.

The problem is, although Ngannou won in a lot of people's eyes, he lost on paper. I had him losing but Boxrec should be based on results rather than an individual's subjective opinion.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑07 Dec 2023, 02:20

joshj909 wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 18:23

gilgamesh wrote: ↑06 Dec 2023, 15:42 To me it's not crazy to rank a guy in the Top 30 when he holds the Heavyweight Champion of the World to a Split Decision and knocks him down.

The problem is, although Ngannou won in a lot of people's eyes, he lost on paper. I had him losing but Boxrec should be based on results rather than an individual's subjective opinion.

It is taking the result into account. The result was a highly competitive fight with a Split Decision that caused a lot of debate.

All losses are not created equal.