Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-03-2013, 04:23 AM   #166
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,755
vCash: 330
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

If he does move I'm sure it'll be by a consensus vote and not one persons say so.

Even the ring rankings are now decided by one man. This is the only credible system out there.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-03-2013, 09:36 PM   #167
Jonsey
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,589
vCash: 500
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
If he does move I'm sure it'll be by a consensus vote and not one persons say so.

Even the ring rankings are now decided by one man. This is the only credible system out there.
Tajbert lost to the guy who is ranked No.10 who lost to the guy who is No.9.....and has only had 6 rounders since.
Jonsey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 02:33 AM   #168
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,755
vCash: 330
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonsey View Post
Tajbert lost to the guy who is ranked No.10 who lost to the guy who is No.9.....and has only had 6 rounders since.
Right, like I said, if he changes I'm sure it will be due to a panel decision and not one person's say so.

Since it's inception I've yet to see any rankings better.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 12:24 PM   #169
Jonsey
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,589
vCash: 500
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
Right, like I said, if he changes I'm sure it will be due to a panel decision and not one person's say so.

Since it's inception I've yet to see any rankings better.
you havent looked.
Jonsey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 04:19 PM   #170
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,249
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Hello Rob. I'm sorry i haven't got back to you sooner, I've been very busy wit this whole top 100 monster in Classic.

You seem quite hostile to the TBR rankings. This concerns me. I can't think of a reason for it aside from that perhaps you feel usurped. If I recall correctly you used to call your own rankings "The Official Rankings of ESB?" I used to follow it quite avidly. There was plenty that I disagreed with but it always seemed that your eye was in the right place an your reasons for doing it were bang on -- your habit of changing your rankings in accordance with what your fellow posters thought is actually quite close to what happens with us.

Rob, posts like this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesy
Seriously do these guys even watch boxing!
Aren't helpful and won't be tolerated. Of course we watch boxing. You might watch more boxing than I do, but if you do you'll be one of the few on the forum. I don't watch more boxing than everyone in the TBR and that's a fact. You've seen some things you don't like with our rankings; fine. I've seen plenty I don't like with yours since you began them - the difference is you won't find any seemingly embittered "do these guys even watch boxing!?" type posts in any of your threads.

Of course, there is plenty for you to disagree with - in the past weeks and in the coming years there will be mistakes, mis-steps, bum-moves all sorts of shit like that. I'm not embarrassed by them and although I and the other guys will do our best to cut them off, everyone involved is volunteering their time on their lunch-hours, in their leisure time all for non-profit for pretty much the same reasons you started yours.

The only reason there isn't a thread identical to this one in the British forum is out of respect for that fact that this is where you post your rankings. TRB is fully endorsed by ESB (and about a dozen other websites) and i'm sure you'll agree that not all websites (for example, Boxrec) would be so tolerant as to allow an alternative thread. I don't see it that way. There's more than enough room for both.

I hope you can take the same point of view. If you can't, i'll have to remove your posts. I hope you consider this fair warning.

I'll get to the post you made in a moment.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 04:58 PM   #171
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,249
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonsey View Post
Appreciate the rankings. My issue is there appears to be no consistancey. You rank some fighters based on a good loss, and others you don’t consider. You rank fighters that have lost and performed badly consistantley and others you drop after one loss.
This will be dependent upon what happens in the specific divisions. A weaker division (HW is a good example) might see a fighter slip into the top ten based upon a good showing against a ranked contender. In a stronger division, this might not be the case.

But it IS the case that an individual member who is particularly impressed might develop momentum that is not deserved. This could definitely happen. It will happen. Nobody is trying to say that these rankings are perfect.

What we are saying is that they are entirely without external influence.

That is to say, if there is a mistake, it will be an honest one, it will be corrected.

Quote:
You guys need to be clearer about how important it is to have done things in the past year, and when wins stop counting towarda a resume. Example, Dirrell hasnt done anything for 3 years but before that he beat AA and Froch. But Adamek & Sturm have spent 3 years losing and getting gifts and stay ranked?
But I disagree with you that Adamek has "spent 3 years losing and getting gifts." Now where does that leave us?

Quote:
Wlad should be champ at HW but thats another argument.
Not under our championship policy which is the most strict i'm aware of for a reason.

Quote:
Adamek vs Cunningham and Chambers were robberies as bad as Pacquiao vs Bradley.
Personally, I find that ludicrous. Adamek and Cunnigham was a fight with a round between them on my card, Pac-Bradley was a hammering on my card.

Additionally, cards from within the stadium are far closer. The reason for this is to do with punches landed with power. Punches landed with power are notoriously difficult to pick out on television if they are not landed with "juddering" power. The best example of this is Valuev-Holyfield. Valuev-Holyfield was viewed as a blatant robbery on the television. 45/50 cards fileld in at ringside were filled in in favour of Valuev. That is to say, those watching on television saw it blatantly for Holyfield, those in the stadium saw it for Valuev. Controversy abounds.

This is why we must show restraint for overturning judges decisions. They have by far the better view.

Returning to Bradley-Pacquiao, Pacquiao outlanded Bradley for jabs AND power punches. Meanwhile Cunningham out-landed Adamek for jabs, but was heavily outlanded in terms of power-punches. THIS is why my Adamek-Cunningham card was close. That is why cards from the auditorium were generally closer than those scored via television.

Quote:
Hernandez beat Cunningham who beat Huck!
That's hardly a lock though, is it? I see Huck as #1, that's something that can be hung upon me. It is a view shared by Fightnews, among others, and can hardly be considered a strange point of view.

You seem oddly determined to overturn anything with a whiff of "bad judging" around it. That is a relative term, however. Furthermore, rankings, viewed historically are designed to record what happens in the world of boxing rather than interpret it, in as much as that is possible.

TBR has asserted that in extreme circumstances - extreme - we can overturn a strange result. I'm happy with that balance. Overturning official results from an armchair concerns me deeply.

Quote:
Tarver also has no place in the top 5!
He's outside the top five...

Quote:
No doubt Bellew performed well against #5 Cleverly, but you can’t honestly rank him ahead of Jurgen Braehmer or Fonfora.
This will come as a staggering blow to Fightnews (who rank him ahead of Fonfora) and Boxing Monthly (who rank him ahead of both). We do too. Like them, we stand by it. As i've demonstrated it is in no way a strange point of view.

You seem to want to present what are normal, common rankings as bizarre or unusual. It is good that you hold faith with your own rankings, but just because we disagree doesn't make you right and us wrong.


Quote:
Dawson is coming of a loss and will have gone a year without defending his title soon will be be stripped?
No.

Quote:
This is where the consistancy factor comes in. In other divisons Magee & Dirrell would still be ranked.
I think you are wrong, I think we have indeed been consistent, I think the idea that Magee and Dirrell would still rank based upon the evidence you've presented is flat out wrong.

Groves win over DeGale and Johnson are better than Oo’s.[/quote]

Here, you and I agree. I've been pushing for Groves to be moved up for some time. The majority of the board, disagree. We shall see.

Quote:
Sturm needs be out of there. His last 5 fights he has 2 losses, 2 draws and a win at best.
No, he is 2-2-1. That is why he has dropped sharply. One more loss and he is out, if he wins his next fight he will stay/move up. The fights will out. If we are too conservative in a given movement for you, it gets tidied up next time out.

Quote:
You can’t rank Martin Murray based on a draw vs Sturm who went on to do **** all after. His best win is Nick Blackwell!
Jesus Christ Rob, yes we can. Murray gets introduced based upon his draw with Sturm, then rated much higher. What should happen now according to you? According to us, he will either capitalise, or be eliminated naturally. There is no rankings body in history that moves fighters down based upon the performances of victims after the fact. Our ranking of this fighter is similar to Fightnews and Boxing Monthly (my favourite rankings on the net prior to getting involved with TBR which is why i reference them) This is a ludicrous assertion and is getting a bit silly now fella. You're obviously out to pick on whatever disagreements you can and try to make an issue out of it.


I think what you have to accept is that your rankings and our rankings are not going to be exactly the same and get on with things.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 12:35 AM   #172
Jonsey
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,589
vCash: 500
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

McGrain. Respect to you for getting back to me. I immediatley apolagised for my "do you watch boxing" comment and will again. I am sorry. Yes my hostilaty towards these rankings, although all my comments were genuine, was because of my own rankings.

From my point of view, you have to understand I was given the position of running the official ESB rankings a few years ago as the main mod liked what I was doing. I took the job very seriously, involved the entire forum and never let my personal opinion sway the rankings. I would update them every single week, top 15 in each division.

My eventual goal was to have a simular setup to you guys. Those plans were scupperd by a the mods at the time that had an agenda against me which started because I involved other podcasts and websites in the rankings just like you guys. They didnt like that other podcasts were mentioned on the forum and they didn't support the rankings because there wasnt a formula like Boxrec!!! They banned me, edited my rankings and deleted them.

Things have changed now and those mods have less control or are no longer at ESB. When I came back I hope to get the rankings back of the ground but I was ignored

So there is allot of jelousy there in all honesty as you guys were able to achieve what I wanted to, and the reasons I was not able to achieve that were not down to me.

I have discussed the points i made with someone on your website. I stand by most of my thoughts but accept there other opinions. My comment to Lucafazy was meant to have a laughter symbol next to it to show I was more joking than anything but on my iphone it doesn't come out. The only serious thing thats flat out wrong with your rankings is Tajbert at Super Feather.

In the case of Sturm/Murray. I do think the performances of Sturm after should affect Murrays ranking. There is no actual TBT title at this point in time so fighters don't climb the rankings like the IBF. The rankings should be based on resume and when you consider Murrays resume you will also consider what Sturm did after the fight. I used to rank the way you guys do and a number of fans complained, specifically regarding Murray as well and I came around to that way of thinking. Sturm/Murray/Solimon shouldn't be in the top 10 for me anyway.

I started my rankings because I wanted to clear through the BS Boxrec, The Ring and the alphabets. Your rankings allow me to do that and I will use them from now on. I think you guys could improve your rankings by doing 15 in each division, A Champion should have to defend his title once a year vs a rabked fighter or be stripped (Dawson), and updating the front page of this thread every week.

Sorry again. I hope you understand why I was so frustrated. Imagine if because you got a podcast to promote the TBR Rankings the thread got deleted and all your work went to waste?

Good luck and anyway I can help let me know.

Last edited by Jonsey; 03-05-2013 at 01:17 AM.
Jonsey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2013, 10:23 AM   #173
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,249
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Fair do's Rob. I knew some, but not all of that and understand your frustration. As long as you keep any criticism constructive and relevant - as in, about the fights that are coming up and where X should be if he does Y to Z, or what you think the consequence should be for a given result that occurred that weekend, i'd love to see you post regularly in this thread.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2013, 05:36 AM   #174
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,249
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Paulus Ambunda

Thirty-two year old Ambunda (20-0) cracks the bantamweight ranks at #10 after beating Pungluang Sor Singyu (now 43-2) over twelve out in Namibia this week.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Do big things lie ahead?

BORKED
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 07:52 PM   #175
Stovepipe
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,224
vCash: 975
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

ight Heavyweight
Champion Chad Dawson
1. Bernard Hopkins
2. Tavoris Cloud
3. Jean Pascal
4. Sergey Kovalev
5. Nathan Cleverly
6. Beibut Shumenov
7. Gabriel Campillo
8. Karo Murat
9. Issac Chilemba
10. Tony Bellew

Campillo kicked Cloud's ass and got crushed by Kovalev. Is it not true that most felt Campillo also beat Murat both times as well as Shumenov both times? Cloud ran about even vs Glen Johnson, an ancient version, and also has Woods, Gonzales, Zuniga and Mack on his resume. But head to head he got absolutely walloped. Seems to me that Campillo should be ranked over Cloud even after taking a drubbing by Kovalev. On the other hand, Kovalev should be ranked above both of them. I can see Dawson 1 Hops 2 Pascal 3 then Kovalev 4 and Cleverly 5 and Campillo 6 but I can't see Cloud being any higher than 6 if you want to move Cleverly below both Cloud and Campillo. But two? two? Hello? The only point in doing your own rankings is if you completely ignore very bad decisions.
Stovepipe is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 09:41 PM   #176
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,249
vCash: 1000
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

I scored Could-Campillo a draw.

CLOUD:1,4,6,11,12
CAMPILLO: 2,3,5,7,8,9,10
113-113


Most people seemed to score it for Campillo but in the 114--112 range. This is where my logic and yours part ways, as I have outlined on the last couple of pages. The Board, as is explained in the charter, do overturn robberies, but not borderline cases or even seemingly bad decisions; only outright robberies. I obviously don't consider this to be such and there is certainly no will to go back and change it retrospectively.

So, this means Cloud is unbeaten, as per his record, and I, as did the judges, saw his victory over Johnson as pretty clean. Gonzalez, Woods, Johnson, Zuniga, Mack and Campillo is as good as anyone in the division has at the moment.

The only areas my personal opinion differs to the board's at LHW. is that I would have Pascal below Kovalev. Other than that, I think we're golden.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 01:47 AM   #177
Stovepipe
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,224
vCash: 975
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
I scored Could-Campillo a draw.

CLOUD:1,4,6,11,12
CAMPILLO: 2,3,5,7,8,9,10
113-113


Most people seemed to score it for Campillo but in the 114--112 range. This is where my logic and yours part ways, as I have outlined on the last couple of pages. The Board, as is explained in the charter, do overturn robberies, but not borderline cases or even seemingly bad decisions; only outright robberies. I obviously don't consider this to be such and there is certainly no will to go back and change it retrospectively.

So, this means Cloud is unbeaten, as per his record, and I, as did the judges, saw his victory over Johnson as pretty clean. Gonzalez, Woods, Johnson, Zuniga, Mack and Campillo is as good as anyone in the division has at the moment.

The only areas my personal opinion differs to the board's at LHW. is that I would have Pascal below Kovalev. Other than that, I think we're golden.
I remember watching it thinking Campillo dominated that fight. I also remember that most people felt the same way.

Here is an article entitled "Theft in Corpus Christi" on a little website called Eastside Boxing. Paul Strauss is the author.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Scott Christ at another prominent website did an article called
Cloud vs Campillo Results: Gabriel Campillo Robbed Again, This Time in Texas


from that piece :
The absolute closest I could see this fight would be 114-112 for Campillo, which is the card that Showtime unofficial scorer Chuck Giampa had. That would be eight rounds to four for for Campillo.

The two judges who scored for Campillo had one world title fight between them. Also from that piece: Twitter erupted with fighters saying they felt Campillo was robbed, including Bernard Hopkins, Paulie Malignaggi, and Ishe Smith,

another prominent website entitled their piece
A Terrific Fight Marred: Gabriel Campillo Robbed in Corpus Christi


By [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
(Featured Columnist)


A Terrific Fight Marred: Gabriel Campillo Robbed in Corpus Christi



They took a poll on that website and 94.3% of the respondents said he was robbed.


another prominent headline at yet another prominent boxing website was
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

Following the telecast’s co-feature, SHOWTIME analyst Al Bernstein said, “How this fight could be scored 116-110 on a judge’s scorecard is beyond comprehension. It’s one of the most egregious decisions I’ve ever seen.” The crowd echoed this sentiment with a cacophony of boos from the 4,599 in attendance following the announcement of the decision for Cloud over Campillo.


All you have to do is go the comments sections of these articles and see that you are clearly in the minority in thinking the fight was anything other than a clear decision for Campillo.

from yet another long time well known boxing writer: My scorecard read 116-112 for the Spaniard Campillo. Historian Ronald Marshall gave Cloud the first, sixth & final (12) round (115-113), while ----com writer Socrates Palmer had Cloud winning only the first and last, meaning a 116-112 win for Campillo!

Interesting point from one of the ENDLESS comments about how this fight was a robbery: Judge Dennis Nelson is certified by the Association of Boxing Commissions and had Capillo winning. Judges David Robertson and Joel were NOT certified by the ABC and ruled for Cloud.

ANOTHER headline from one of the biggest boxing sites: Tavoris Cloud decisions Campillo in a harsh robbery.

that thread behind that fight has ten pages of people screaming robbery and calling for suspension of the judges

here is esb telling you its a total robbery

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=382566

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=383970

here are the fans there at the fight saying its bs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbFs6UaxaMs&context=C3b34fa7ADOEgsToPDskI21zeUcFcw1z1PoJeZEY8J&noredirect=1

Look if it is a CLEAR victory for one guy over the other, it doesnt matter if its 114-112 or 120-108, hell, usually when they ROB someone they make it an SD or an MD anyways, this idea that its only a robbery if the guy who clearly won the fight did so by a landslide, is a silly idea in my opinion.

Seems to me that the majority of people have this a four point fight in Campillo's favor, based on what I am reading.

Cloud gets three points in the first, and wins two other rounds. The other nine points are Campillos.

I would like to see your draw card so I can see the rounds that you gave to Cloud that nobody else did.

If EVERYONE agrees (and assuming they are correct) that Campillo one by four points, or at the worst TWO points, then THAT my friend is a ROBBERY.

I can't find anybody making a case that this fight was a draw or a cloud victory. It was a very very very clear Campillo victory

here is yet another thread here at esb saying it was a robbery

http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=387920

If you can turn a fight upside down, sideways, shake it up, reanalyze it and you cant make a case that the guy that won it deserved to win it, how is that NOT a robbery???

Now on the other side of this, there are many fights that are called a robbery because of idiotic fans trying to use strong words to build a weak case. Fights that you can strongly argue that the actual victor was the real victor. However, I couldn't find any boxing intellects trying to take that position from what I have been reading. I can't find the so called voices of sanity that get beyond the emotionalism of screaming robbery and saying "hey watch this one closely, Cloud actually won, or it was a draw"

And most people seem to have Campillo by more than two points from everything I have been reading.


Stovepipe is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 01:51 AM   #178
Stovepipe
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,224
vCash: 975
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Therefore this is NOT a BORDERLINE case. If it is a CLEAR TWO TO FOUR POINT VICTORY then there is nothing borderline about that.
Stovepipe is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 02:02 AM   #179
Stovepipe
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,224
vCash: 975
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stovepipe View Post
Therefore this is NOT a BORDERLINE case. If it is a CLEAR TWO TO FOUR POINT VICTORY then there is nothing borderline about that.
Its the clarity that you need to focus on. If one guy beats another guy by five seconds in a mile run and they say the other guy won that came in second, you don't say "well he was only five seconds behind him so lets let it pass"

This wasn't some sort of photo finish. The overwhelming consensus is that Cloud either won HANDILY or won at the VERY LEAST by two points.

You need to change your definition of what a robbery is. I understand your idea that well if its close and it goes one way we won't rule against it, but in my opinion you ought to simply have everyone watching it and ranking just base their rankings on what they saw and take in consideration the judges as much as they themselves wish to, what is the point of having a rankings system if it gets over ruled by the innate corruption of the system and factors that into its very rankings??? Who needs a system like that?

In any event, its bizarre to me to just play along as if Cloud actually won the fight and rank him accordingly when everyone knows he got a beat down by Campillo. This is make believe land, then?

I mean where is the logic in this: Well, it was a clear victory for Campillo, I had it a draw, the majority of fans thought Campillo won, but since the judges said Cloud won, I'll just rank it as if he really did.

I mean, the whole point of doing your own rankings is to completely defy the utter bullshit we are being fed by the alphabets and ring mag etc, and here you are just factoring it in!
Stovepipe is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 02:05 AM   #180
Stovepipe
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,224
vCash: 975
Default Re: The Transnational Boxing Rankings

CLOUD:1,4,6,11,12

Ok I missed that before I will have to rewatch, you are waaaay out on a limb. Most give him, at the most two, or at the very best, three rounds after the first. Doesn't mean you are wrong but you are in a very tiny minority from what I am seeing.
Stovepipe is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > General Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013