Quote Originally Posted by powerpuncher View Post
An algorithm can only use quantifiable evidence. It can’t take into account the eye test. I’m not sure how boxrec ranks its fighters, but even its rankings of current fighters is pretty bad. It also can’t account for off nights or losing to known cheaters. There are so many things that an algorithm can’t account for that it will never be a good list.

Although when we humans do it, we give completely different lists so maybe we are just as wrong.
A good algorithm will take in to account far more layers than any human is capable of taking into account. FE-opposition, oppositions opposition, oppositions oppositions opposition, etcetera, age, timing compared to prime, 800 other ways. But you can look at this list, I haven’t read about it, and you can tell it’s heavily weighted towards wins/losses and opposition. Unfortunately too weighted. I always say all that matters is who you fight, but I think it’s understood that isn’t all that matters. There’s 1000 layers and you can’t weigh them equally, some of it you have to see, you have to see SRL against Hearns to understand SRLs greatness. To see that a man can be better than they are. It’s not just that a man wins or losses but how they win or lose. And I don’t mean KO or decision, but did he try alternative tactics, did he dare to be great when losing or did he Broner.