BoxRec

TAke a look at the new all time rankings. Some interesting outcomes.

I can't see any Buzz!!! :x

Well last time I checked Ezzard was at the top of the HW division and now it's Ali. I'm talking about in the BoxRec Data base

BoxBuzz wrote:TAke a look at the new all time rankings. Some interesting outcomes.

Vlad Klitschko ahead of Jack Dempsey (as well as Goerge Foreman, Joe Frazier) - if BrocktonBlockbuster sees this he'll shut down your server...

oh that's just the tip of the iceberg,

At first I thought the all time ratings had been unaffected because I had the old ones stored in my computer memory and was looking over my own internal copies....and I thought...this new system hasn't changed things much. Then I saw my mistake and took a look at the online live version and I had to put down my Foster's because I was certain that someone had tampered with it.

But I am determined not to react until I have read over this for about a week. I need to detemine the "net" change rather than what has happened to this or that favorite. But it is dramatic and some unexplainable stuff both postive and negative have occured here.

I just need some time......and to get away from the beer for a month in order to assess this.

Is there any logic to them? Surely with all the self-proclaimed boxing historians and alleged experts floating around in here they could come up with something that doesn't smell like a pile of rotting fish.

:(

Collins, change doesnt come easy to the elderly they tell me. But with my youthful attitude I may be able to find a way to somehow find peace with this. And have you reviewed all the weight classes already? Or have you just figured assess first, read the details later? Heres the HW...top 25.

1 Muhammad Ali 1,656 1960 - 1981 56-5-0

2 Jimmy Bivins 1,646 1940 - 1955 86-25-1

3 Ezzard Charles 1,633 1940 - 1959 89-25-1

4 Joe Louis 1,628 1934 - 1951 69-3-0

5 Lennox Lewis 1,576 1989 - 2003 41-2-1

6 Evander Holyfield 1,566 1984 - 2004 38-8-2

7 Jersey Joe Walcott 1,542 1930 - 1953 51-18-2

8 Floyd Patterson 1,521 1952 - 1972 55-8-1

9 Larry Holmes 1,520 1973 - 2002 69-6-0

10 Mike Tyson 1,519 1985 - 2005 50-6-0

11 Rocky Marciano 1,518 1947 - 1955 49-0-0

12 Tony Shucco 1,512 1928 - 1944 91-17-11

13 Jack Sharkey 1,507 1924 - 1936 38-14-3

14 Bob Pastor 1,495 1935 - 1942 53-7-5

15 Young Stribling 1,485 1921 - 1933 255-16-14

16 Sam Langford 1,473 1902 - 1926 198-46-46

17 Zora Folley 1,470 1953 - 1970 79-11-6

18 Johnny Risko 1,466 1923 - 1940 79-53-7

19 Primo Carnera 1,463 1928 - 1946 88-15-0

20 Ernie Schaaf 1,463 1927 - 1933 58-14-2

21 Max Schmeling 1,461 1924 - 1948 56-10-4

22 Eddie Machen 1,461 1955 - 1967 50-11-3

23 Sonny Liston 1,460 1953 - 1970 50-4-0

24 Gene Tunney 1,455 1915 - 1928 83-2-2

25 James Toney 1,447 1988 - 2006 69-4-3

BoxBuzz wrote:Collins, change doesnt come easy to the elderly they tell me. But with my youthful attitude I may be able to find a way to somehow find peace with this. And have you reviewed all the weight classes already?

Just the heavies, buzzy. That was enough wasn't it?. Or are you implying the other weights are less skewed?

First thing I noticed was no Klondyke. This is the guy who according to some alleged historians on here was better than Holmes and Foreman.

BoxBuzz wrote:Collins, change doesnt come easy to the elderly they tell me. But with my youthful attitude I may be able to find a way to somehow find peace with this. And have you reviewed all the weight classes already? Or have you just figured assess first, read the details later? Heres the HW...top 25.

1 Muhammad Ali 1,656 1960 - 1981 56-5-0

2 Jimmy Bivins 1,646 1940 - 1955 86-25-1

3 Ezzard Charles 1,633 1940 - 1959 89-25-1

4 Joe Louis 1,628 1934 - 1951 69-3-0

5 Lennox Lewis 1,576 1989 - 2003 41-2-1

6 Evander Holyfield 1,566 1984 - 2004 38-8-2

7 Jersey Joe Walcott 1,542 1930 - 1953 51-18-2

8 Floyd Patterson 1,521 1952 - 1972 55-8-1

9 Larry Holmes 1,520 1973 - 2002 69-6-0

10 Mike Tyson 1,519 1985 - 2005 50-6-0

11 Rocky Marciano 1,518 1947 - 1955 49-0-0

12 Tony Shucco 1,512 1928 - 1944 91-17-11

13 Jack Sharkey 1,507 1924 - 1936 38-14-3

14 Bob Pastor 1,495 1935 - 1942 53-7-5

15 Young Stribling 1,485 1921 - 1933 255-16-14

16 Sam Langford 1,473 1902 - 1926 198-46-46

17 Zora Folley 1,470 1953 - 1970 79-11-6

18 Johnny Risko 1,466 1923 - 1940 79-53-7

19 Primo Carnera 1,463 1928 - 1946 88-15-0

20 Ernie Schaaf 1,463 1927 - 1933 58-14-2

21 Max Schmeling 1,461 1924 - 1948 56-10-4

22 Eddie Machen 1,461 1955 - 1967 50-11-3

23 Sonny Liston 1,460 1953 - 1970 50-4-0

24 Gene Tunney 1,455 1915 - 1928 83-2-2

25 James Toney 1,447 1988 - 2006 69-4-3

I feel like I've stepped into the twilight zone!.... :x :x ...after Ali at number one it all becomes quite silly!... I mean Lewis at 5 and Liston at 23!!!!!!......... :x :x :x :x :x ... wheres my puke bag mumma!

silkov wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:Collins, change doesnt come easy to the elderly they tell me. But with my youthful attitude I may be able to find a way to somehow find peace with this. And have you reviewed all the weight classes already? Or have you just figured assess first, read the details later? Heres the HW...top 25.

1 Muhammad Ali 1,656 1960 - 1981 56-5-0

2 Jimmy Bivins 1,646 1940 - 1955 86-25-1

3 Ezzard Charles 1,633 1940 - 1959 89-25-1

4 Joe Louis 1,628 1934 - 1951 69-3-0

5 Lennox Lewis 1,576 1989 - 2003 41-2-1

6 Evander Holyfield 1,566 1984 - 2004 38-8-2

7 Jersey Joe Walcott 1,542 1930 - 1953 51-18-2

8 Floyd Patterson 1,521 1952 - 1972 55-8-1

9 Larry Holmes 1,520 1973 - 2002 69-6-0

10 Mike Tyson 1,519 1985 - 2005 50-6-0

11 Rocky Marciano 1,518 1947 - 1955 49-0-0

12 Tony Shucco 1,512 1928 - 1944 91-17-11

13 Jack Sharkey 1,507 1924 - 1936 38-14-3

14 Bob Pastor 1,495 1935 - 1942 53-7-5

15 Young Stribling 1,485 1921 - 1933 255-16-14

16 Sam Langford 1,473 1902 - 1926 198-46-46

17 Zora Folley 1,470 1953 - 1970 79-11-6

18 Johnny Risko 1,466 1923 - 1940 79-53-7

19 Primo Carnera 1,463 1928 - 1946 88-15-0

20 Ernie Schaaf 1,463 1927 - 1933 58-14-2

21 Max Schmeling 1,461 1924 - 1948 56-10-4

22 Eddie Machen 1,461 1955 - 1967 50-11-3

23 Sonny Liston 1,460 1953 - 1970 50-4-0

24 Gene Tunney 1,455 1915 - 1928 83-2-2

25 James Toney 1,447 1988 - 2006 69-4-3

I feel like I've stepped into the twilight zone!.... :x :x ...after Ali at number one it all becomes quite silly!... I mean Lewis at 5 and Liston at 23!!!!!!......... :x :x :x :x :x ... wheres my puke bag mumma!

It's indeed easy to dissect this list. Stribling and Risko ahead of Schmeling? Didn't Schmeling knock out both?

pundit wrote:

silkov wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:Collins, change doesnt come easy to the elderly they tell me. But with my youthful attitude I may be able to find a way to somehow find peace with this. And have you reviewed all the weight classes already? Or have you just figured assess first, read the details later? Heres the HW...top 25.

1 Muhammad Ali 1,656 1960 - 1981 56-5-0

2 Jimmy Bivins 1,646 1940 - 1955 86-25-1

3 Ezzard Charles 1,633 1940 - 1959 89-25-1

4 Joe Louis 1,628 1934 - 1951 69-3-0

5 Lennox Lewis 1,576 1989 - 2003 41-2-1

6 Evander Holyfield 1,566 1984 - 2004 38-8-2

7 Jersey Joe Walcott 1,542 1930 - 1953 51-18-2

8 Floyd Patterson 1,521 1952 - 1972 55-8-1

9 Larry Holmes 1,520 1973 - 2002 69-6-0

10 Mike Tyson 1,519 1985 - 2005 50-6-0

11 Rocky Marciano 1,518 1947 - 1955 49-0-0

12 Tony Shucco 1,512 1928 - 1944 91-17-11

13 Jack Sharkey 1,507 1924 - 1936 38-14-3

14 Bob Pastor 1,495 1935 - 1942 53-7-5

15 Young Stribling 1,485 1921 - 1933 255-16-14

16 Sam Langford 1,473 1902 - 1926 198-46-46

17 Zora Folley 1,470 1953 - 1970 79-11-6

18 Johnny Risko 1,466 1923 - 1940 79-53-7

19 Primo Carnera 1,463 1928 - 1946 88-15-0

20 Ernie Schaaf 1,463 1927 - 1933 58-14-2

21 Max Schmeling 1,461 1924 - 1948 56-10-4

22 Eddie Machen 1,461 1955 - 1967 50-11-3

23 Sonny Liston 1,460 1953 - 1970 50-4-0

24 Gene Tunney 1,455 1915 - 1928 83-2-2

25 James Toney 1,447 1988 - 2006 69-4-3

I feel like I've stepped into the twilight zone!.... :x :x ...after Ali at number one it all becomes quite silly!... I mean Lewis at 5 and Liston at 23!!!!!!......... :x :x :x :x :x ... wheres my puke bag mumma!

It's indeed easy to dissect this list. Stribling and Risko ahead of Schmeling? Didn't Schmeling knock out both?

Liston at 23 and Patterson at 6!!!.... I thought it was Liston that koed Patterson 2 times in one round! :x :x :x

This list must be a monument to the folly of democracy if ever I've seen one!... only a chosen few should be allowed to vote for the greats and only a chosen few should be able to decide who that chosen few should be!... :x

silkov wrote:

pundit wrote:It's indeed easy to dissect this list. Stribling and Risko ahead of Schmeling? Didn't Schmeling knock out both?

Liston at 23 and Patterson at 6!!!.... I thought it was Liston that koed Patterson 2 times in one round! :x :x :x

At least Patterson was champ for a long time - Risko and Stribling never where (at HW).

pundit wrote:

silkov wrote:

pundit wrote:It's indeed easy to dissect this list. Stribling and Risko ahead of Schmeling? Didn't Schmeling knock out both?

Liston at 23 and Patterson at 6!!!.... I thought it was Liston that koed Patterson 2 times in one round! :x :x :x

At least Patterson was champ for a long time - Risko and Stribling never where (at HW).

Well I like Patterson but no way should he be higher than Liston... Liston is top 10 at least...

Where the heck is Klondyke?

I can live with no George Foreman but no Klondyke too?

I could explain all of this if we were in the first week of April.

Come on, we should all know any 'computized' list of fighters is gonna end up being a little wacky. Can you really get upset at a list that lists Tony Shucco as the 12th greatest HW of all time??

dempseyfire wrote:Come on, we should all know any 'computized' list of fighters is gonna end up being a little wacky. Can you really get upset at a list that lists Tony Shucco as the 12th greatest HW of all time??

Agreed, this is why it is so important to have subjective experts readily on hand here at BoxRec. Impresarios giving insight and understanding while revealing to you, the ordinary citizen, why computers will always be prone to errors when it comes to pugilistic outcomes and ratings. An area of study proven to be the most subtle and complex of all-calculable scenarios

BoxBuzz wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Come on, we should all know any 'computized' list of fighters is gonna end up being a little wacky. Can you really get upset at a list that lists Tony Shucco as the 12th greatest HW of all time??

Agreed, this is why it is so important to have subjective experts readily on hand here at BoxRec. Impresarios such as myself, giving insight and understanding while revealing to you, the ordinary citizen, why computers will always be prone to errors when it comes to pugilistic outcomes and ratings. An area of study proven to be the most subtle and complex of all-calculable scenarios

I just had a look at that Shucco character's records as I had never heard of him. There is no way that I can see how he could be in the top 100 (maybe even top 500) heavies of all time.

Of course, any ranking system will be open to interpretation and throw up the odd anomoly but this list is total shite.

Can you shed any light how the ratings are compiled?

It's strictly a custom weighted mathmatical formula Collins. The old list was just as odd but different. So far I can't see a "net" change in quality.

Pure Math is perhaps the worst way to do this but at least you can claim to be objective. I have asked if the formula can be tinkered with and you can reach out to computerrank who is at the helm of this project and give your input if you like.

It would take an engineer to think this out, All I could do to help is suggest that we give Archie Moore one hundred points for each outing and everybody else somewhere between 3 and 17 points for each attempt. I figure that would just about get you the perfect software formula to solve this.

Collins2000 wrote:I just had a look at that Shucco character's records as I had never heard of him. There is no way that I can see how he could be in the top 100 (maybe even top 500) heavies of all time.

Well he did beat Harry Bobo and Al Sinibaldi. He seems to have fought quite a few good fighters. Of course most of them weren't HWs and he lost most of those fights...

Hmmm, I think these latest rankings look even sillier than the earlier ones -- both the current and the all-time rankings.

Hey John L....was it that these are really "less" or had we just grown accustom to the old ones?

Decagon wrote:As long as Jim Corbett stays out of the top 500, I'm happy.

The fact that you're happy shows how wacky the list is!... Corbett not in the top 500??... try reading a bit of boxing history son...

BoxBuzz wrote:Hey John L....was it that these are really "less" or had we just grown accustom to the old ones?

Good point. I would say that the all time probably just looks different, but I think the current actually took a net step backward. Of course, some look better and some look worse, but the net affect I think is worse.