Re: Boxrec RULES!!!!

Originally Posted by
SaddoBoxer
My point is, that's how BoxRec do the ratings. Let's take a look of BoxRec top 3 boxers with their corresponding points in 147, 140 and 135 divisions:
147
1. Antonio Margarito 1327
2. Shane Mosley 832
3. Miguel Angel Cotto 722
140
1. Manny Pacquiao 1673
2. Ricky Hatton 1469
3. Andriy Kotelnik 905
135
1. Juan Manuel Marquez 1592
2. Nate Campbell 1097
3. Joan Guzman 813
If BoxRec places Pacquiao in any of these 3 divisions, he will be the #1 in that division since he has the highest points among the boxers.
The argument that he can't be #1 because he hasn't fought in that division can't be used here. PAC fought at 147 and 135 and he still has the highest points so BoxRec will consider him as #1 in those divisions. So those using this argument can't complain if BoxRec put PAC as #1 in 147 or in 135 division since he fought in those divisions.
We all know long time ago that BoxRec computerized points ranking system could be flawed. Why all the grumbles?
BoxRec can place PAC as #1 in 147 or 140 or 135 division since he has the highest points among the boxers in those divisions.
You can continue complaining but that's how BoxRec do it...
.
And that's why their system is utter crap. The grumbles continue because you keep trying to defend a flawed system. This thread wouldn't have lasted as many pages and posts if you had not started making shit up and quoting tabloids to try to verify what can't be proven.
PS. Boxrec, The WBC, The WBA and the WBO still have not written anything back in defense of Pacquiao or Valero, must be because of the holiday season.
For every story told that divides us, I believe there are a thousand untold that unite us.
Bookmarks