Has Anyone been on Boxrec Lately?

[BoomBoom]

Whats going on with the #1 ranked fighters?

[Violent Demise]

What the hell you talking about?

[KickboxAmob]

Wjajajajaja

[LarryB]

Whats going on with the #1 ranked fighters?

[BoomBoom]

I just dont know how Arthur Abrahams and Erdei are ranked #1. Taylor and Winky should be above Abrahams

[James]

yeah i went on this morning, their ranking system which is always slightly questionable has generated some real classics of late, i guess its inactivity thats done it.

[amat]

They changed up the ranking system

Erdei, Abraham, Diaz and Harrison are all #1 in there respective divisions

[The_One77]

boxrec haven't got a flying clue what they are on about half the time
I wouldn't take any notice of them

[TyBuff]

The way that they do their rankings does not figure in how good the fighter actually is. In case you didnt know they use a mathematical formula to figure the fighter rankings.

[Kev]

The way that they do their rankings does not figure in how good the fighter actually is. In case you didnt know they use a mathematical formula to figure the fighter rankings.

Thats actually pretty interesting because most sports are decided by mathematical formulaes really apart from boxing.

I mean take football,(soccer). At the start of the season Wigan were flying high near the top of the league. No one would argue that they were the best team in the premiership at that time but there results meant they had scored enough points to merit their place at the top.

Perhaps boxrec, although completely absurd at times to us is actually entirely correct in terms of fighter positions in terms of judging who merits a particular position at a certain point in time.

[TyBuff]

The way that they do their rankings does not figure in how good the fighter actually is. In case you didnt know they use a mathematical formula to figure the fighter rankings.

Thats actually pretty interesting because most sports are decided by mathematical formulaes really apart from boxing.

I mean take football,(soccer). At the start of the season Wigan were flying high near the top of the league. No one would argue that they were the best team in the premiership at that time but there results meant they had scored enough points to merit their place at the top.

Perhaps boxrec, although completely absurd at times to us is actually entirely correct in terms of fighter positions in terms of judging who merits a particular position at a certain point in time.

I believe the way boxrec does it is that they assign boxer A "X" amount of points then with each win or lose those points go up or down. Then depending on who your opponent has fought their points go up and down which affects how many points boxer A receives.

To me this type of formula does not work well with boxing because it does not take into account the actually ability of each fighter. Just because they fought fighter D doesnt mean that they are of equal or lesser ability.

[James]

i think the idea of mathmatical ratings are in many ways a good idea, but its still subjective in how boxrec assigns ranking points, they lose them for not fighting, various methods of scoreing for obtaining TKO and KO's sometimes i think its so complicated it overlooks the strength of the oppenent in favour of how the decision was earned.

[shza]

The way that they do their rankings does not figure in how good the fighter actually is. In case you didnt know they use a mathematical formula to figure the fighter rankings.

Thats actually pretty interesting because most sports are decided by mathematical formulaes really apart from boxing.

I mean take football,(soccer). At the start of the season Wigan were flying high near the top of the league. No one would argue that they were the best team in the premiership at that time but there results meant they had scored enough points to merit their place at the top.

Perhaps boxrec, although completely absurd at times to us is actually entirely correct in terms of fighter positions in terms of judging who merits a particular position at a certain point in time.

The big difference between boxing and other sports, which kills the usefulness of porting over those other sports' ranking/standings systems, is that there is no mandate that boxers fight the same amount of fights as each other (nor are their opponents assigned randomly). So you could have a guy who just fights a new complete chump every other week rapidly rack up 8 Ws in the time it would take most good boxers to fight a single time. Too many variables to go that way.

[chrisbird13]

They are aware of the problem it seems:

Quote "The ratings program has recently been updated. The new formula is optimised to give the best prediction rate and is statistically more accurate than the old one. Our ratings are created to give the maximum objective accuracy and not to "look good", reflect intuition or bow to opinion. We are aware that there are perceived anomalies at the moment and we continue our efforts to make them as perfect as mathematically possible."

I think although it does throw up anomalies it is a useful system as a mathematical system cannot get drawn in by the hype surrounding a boxer!

[shza]

I think although it does throw up anomalies it is a useful system as a mathematical system cannot get drawn in by the hype surrounding a boxer!

I'd like to see the algorithms they're using--it's only as useful as those are good.