Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Twitter MMA Facebook Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools
Old 09-13-2007, 12:30 AM   #1
Belt holder
ESB Addict
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 3,758
vCash: 1000
Default ESB Official Rankings: Constitution First Draft

Hey Guys,

I'm trying to help generate a new set of diverse and expert rankings for ESB, and obviously everyone would like to have you guys involved.



The ESB Official Rankings are designed to reflect the expert opinions of international boxing fans who participate in the ESB virtual community. Given the lack of credibility of the various sanctioning bodies and media publications, along with the inherent limitation of having any one person attempt to rank the world's best fighters, boxing needs a set of more accurate, representative rankings.
This Constitution was crafted to assist with this process, clarifying the rules and guidelines by which the rankings will be compiled and maintained.


The ESB Official Rankings will include Champion and Top 10 Contender rankings for the following divisions: Heavyweight (201+ pounds), Cruiserweight (200 pounds maximum), Light Heavyweight (175), Super Middleweight (168., Middleweight (160), Junior Middleweight (154), Welterweight (147), Junior Welterweight (140), Lightweight (135), Junior Lightweight (130), Featherweight (126), Junior Featherweight (122), Bantamweight (118., Junior Bantamweight (115), Flyweight (112), Junior Flyweight (108. and Strawweight (105).


1) Do we want to merge any divisions, such as Junior Flyweight and Strawweight?

2) Do we want to rank fewer fighters than 10 (say, 5?) at some of the lower divisions?

Another constant element of ESB Official Rankings will be Pound for Pound
rankings. These Top 10 rankings will include fighters from all weight divisions based on overall merit.


Voting will take place once a month, on the first Sunday of the month. Voting will close at 12:00am at time zone UTC-12, effectively keeping voting open until 8:00am EST on Monday morning. After that time, voting is closed for the month. Voters also may submit their votes early, although obviously they set themselves up for reprimand or even expulsion if they fail to incorporate the latest results.


Each voter will have the opportunity to vote on any Champion contingencies (explained later), top 10 Contender rankings for all divisions, and top 10 Pound of Pound Rankings.
However, they are not required to vote on a complete list of fighters, deferring to others in the divisions in which they feel less familiar.
Each voter will post his votes publicly to the ESB Official Rankings Voting thread, which will be posted during the week prior to the first Sunday of the month. There, the ESB community will have access to his picks. Once submitted, the votes CANNOT be changed, barring a redundancy or some other clerical error.
The posts will appear as follows, with Pound for Pound listed first and then proceeding by division in descending order, with that voter's best fighter listed No. 1:

Pound for Pound

1) Fighter X
2) Fighter Y
3) Fighter Z.


1) Fighter A
2) Fighter B
3) Fighter C.


1) Fighter L
2) Fighter M
3) Fighter N.



1) Fighter O
2) Fighter P
3) Fighter Q

Again, voters are not required to fill all slots on either the Pound for Pound or Divisional Rankings.
Additionally, in divisions where there is a Champion, voters will not rank the Champion and simply will list him at the top of their Divisional vote.


Super Middleweight

Champion: Fighter D

1) Fighter E
2) Fighter F
3) Fighter G.

There is no Champion of the Pound of Pound rankings, only a top 10 list of fighters.


Scoring will be based on a 100-point system. Each voter's No. 1 fighter -- for both Divisional and Pound for Pound rankings -- will receive 100 points; No. 2 will receive 90 points; No. 3 will receive 80 points; and so on, through the 10th position. Again, a Champion of a division is not included in the voting or the scoring, so the 100 points in a division ruled by a Champion goes to the No. 1 Contender.
After the voting period closes for the month, each voter's ballot will be tallied. The point totals will added for each fighter across all of the voters' ballots, and the rankings will be compiled based on which fighters have the highest point totals. This will apply for Division rankings and Pound for Pound rankings.
In cases where a voter doesn't completely fill out a division, the unfilled positions in that voter's rankings obviously will be ignored. Also, voters may not designate that a fighters get alternate numbers of points. If a voter lists four fighters in a division, the points awarded will be 100, 90, 80 and 70, respectively. A voter cannot, for example, rank four fighters in a division and then number them as 1), 2), 4) and 7) in an attempt to create separation among the four in terms of points.


On the ESB Official Rankings Voting Thread, each voter will type or post his rankings onto the thread, as mentioned above.
Beneath the rankings, any other issue for vote (e.g., whether a bout is for a title, vacancy issues, expulsion of a member, changes to the Constitution) will appear on this post as well.
Note that the voting on new candidates for membership will not appear on this thread.



In the initial round of voting, voters will decide which fighters are grandfathered into Champion positions. For this first round only, all voters must list a Champion for the divisions in which they believe one exists. Otherwise, 10 Contenders will form the rankings and the Championship will remain vacant.
To become an Official ESB Champion in the initial voting, a fighter must garner a vote of Champion from the majority (anything over 50.0%) of voters. If for some reason a voter chooses not to vote on a division at all, that vote will not count toward that fighter's Champion status either way. (This is highly unlikely to happen.)
If a fighter is listed as Champion by the majority of voters, he becomes the ESB Champion going forward and is subject to the ongoing rules established in the Constitution.


Theoretically, if we like The Ring's list of champions, we could grandfather them in and not worry about voting on this issue.


A fighter, ranked or unranked, automatically becomes a Champion if he defeats the current Champion in the ring.
In cases of a vacancy, if the No. 1 Contender faces the No. 2 Contender, the winner of that contest becomes the new Champion.
If the No. 1 Contender faces the No. 3 Contender, voters will decide in the voting period immediately prior to the fight whether that fight will be waged for the championship. Note that this issue will be decided -- and settled by a majority vote -- before the fight in question takes place, not after.
For example, if No. 1 Contender Fighter A is scheduled to face No. 3 Contender Fighter B on October 17, voting on whether the bout is a Championship contest will occur on the first Sunday of October -- not before, and not after.
Excluding the initial voting period, no fighter can inherit a championship belt. He must win it in the ring, even if the previous Champion is stripped.


1) The No. 1 vs. No. 3 policy reflects what The Ring has done in recent years, but if people don't like it, it can be changed. I personally like it because if No. 2 doesn't seem willing to fight No. 1, No. 1 still should have a chance to win the belt. And if voters believe that No. 1 could and should fight No. 2 but opts for No. 3, they can refuse to designate that fight as a Championship contest.


A Champion can lose his belt for one of three reasons: 1) Losing in the ring, 2) Vacating the division (moving in weight class, retiring, etc.), or 3) Not fighting for more than 365 days. Both No. 1 and No. 2 result in certain loss of the belt. Additionally for No. 2, if a fighter vacates a division and returns later, he does not regain Championship status and must fight for it along with the other Contenders.

No. 3 is a special case. A fighter who is inactive in his division for more than 365 days does not automatically lose his belt, but voters will have the option of stripping that fighter. This will be put to a separate vote for the voters, who will determine by majority vote whether that fighter retains his belt. If the voters elect to strip a Champion for inactivity, he becomes officially Inactive. A Champion who has been deemed Inactive cannot be a Contender, and thus he will be excluded from that division's rankings. He may, however, still be considered for Pound of Pound rankings.


1) No. 3 obviously will be controversial. But I think we need to prevent fighters from taking a division hostage. Allowing voters to decide gives them the option of weeding out legitimate excuses for inactivity versus fighters who are doing nothing but milking a belt without actually defending it.

2) If a fighter is voted Inactive for his division, should he still be eligible for Pound for
Pound? Does that need to be legislated, or will the voters themselves settle that naturally with their votes?
Lampley is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2007, 12:31 AM   #2
Belt holder
ESB Addict
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 3,758
vCash: 1000
Default Re: ESB Official Rankings: Constitution First Draft




This is a very tricky issue, and I'm struggling with it. Ideas would be most helpful.

Scenario No. 1:

Let's say Jermain Taylor is voted or grandfathered in as the ESB Official Middleweight Champion. Taylor then fights No. 1 Contender Kelly Pavlik on September 29, and Pavlik wins the fight.

The rematch clause is for the fight to be held at 168 pounds. Pavlik's title presumably is not at stake. And win or lose, he remains the 160-pound champion provided he comes back down and defends, right?

Scenario No. 2:

Same conditions, but let's say the result of the first Taylor/Pavlik fight is a draw. This time, Taylor says on September 30 that he is vacating the Middleweight division. On November 18, he signs to fight Jeff Lacy at Super Middleweight. He then fights Lacy on January 25.

At what point has Taylor vacated the division?

A) Suppose Pavlik is a madman and gets a fight against No. 2 Middleweight Contender Arthur Abraham on October 31.

B) Let's say Pavlik and Abraham tangle on November 28.

C) Now let's consider Pavlik vs. Abraham on February 6.

Did Taylor vacate the division the moment he said that was his intention (I vote against this, because that gets dicey)? How about when he officially signs for another fight? For 'C,' I'd say it's pretty clear if he says he's vacated and then actually fights in another division.

What if Taylor gets to January 15 and pulls out of the Lacy fight, saying he's injured and wants to return to 160? If ESB voters have decided that Taylor already has vacated, does he automatically get his title back? Should he have to fight for it?

Alternatively, do you wait until the last possible moment, when Taylor actually fights Lacy, to determine that he has vacated. And in that case, do we allow voters to determine retroactively that Pavlik vs. Abraham was for the vacant Middleweight title?

A lot of this stuff can be determined by voters, but I believe there are three Constitutional issues involved?

1) How do we clarify which division a fighter belongs to, and what if he receives votes from different board members in different divisions?

2) At what point has a Champion vacated a belt, determining when the belt is wide open for the other Contenders?

3) Should voters be allowed to decide after the fact that a non-title fight was, in fact, for the title? (My vote would be no.)

Also, is there publication we trust to determine the division issue, so that it doesn't cause confusion for ESB voters heading into a Sunday vote?



The ESB divisional and pound for pound rankings will be voted upon by a select group of posters from the ESB online community. Those who have been voted onto the committee each will have one vote, equal to the vote of every other committee member.
There will be no fixed number of committee members, and membership presumably will grow over time. Voters will vote each period on the fate of board applicants, and they also will have the option of barring any members who fail to participate or who display unethical behavior.


Initially, all ESB posters will be eligible to nominate 24 committee members, spread between the General Forum and Classic Forum. Posters can nominate just one poster, just one time, during this initial nomination period. An Official Nomination Thread will be posted on the General Forum and on the Classic Forum. At the end of the initial voting period, nominations will be tallied.
On the General Forum thread, the top 16 nomination-receivers will be selected for the board. On the Classic Forum thread, the top 8 nomination-receivers will be selected for the board.


1) This process has been discussed at length by several posters, and most seem to believe this is the most representative way to add to the board. Speak now if you have other ideas.


After the initial period, voters can be added only by other voters. All posters at ESB who have contributed at least 1,000 posts are eligible, and they may announced their candidacy in the Official ESB Rankings Applicant Thread that will be started at the beginning of each month. Candidates have through Friday night -- for our purposes, that's 8:00am Saturday morning EST -- to make themselves eligible for vote by the committee members.
On that same thread, posters may argue their cases, and all ESB posters are welcome to either endorse or reject that nominee's candidacy.
Further, a poster must nominate himself for inclusion. No one may nominate that poster in his stead.
On the first Sunday of the month, committee members then will vote whether to accept each candidate. In order to be added to the committee, a nominee must achieve 75% affirmative votes from the committee. If accepted, that candidate becomes eligible to vote the following month.
If a candidate is rejected, the poster may not reapply to the committee for six months. This will cut down on nomination spamming, and hopefully will encourage candidates to consider thoughtfully whether they've contributed enough to the ESB community to warrant inclusion on the board.


At its discretion, the voters may bar one of their peers. If any two members of the group formally ask that a member be expelled, a vote will take place on voting Sunday. If the board votes to dismiss the member at a 66.67% rate, that member immediately and permanently is removed from the board and the poster's rankings will not count for that month.
However, if an expelled member would like to reapply, he may wait six months and then do so. The expelled member then will be subject to the same 75% rule that applies to the general population.


Voting on issues such as addition and subtraction of members is best done anonymously among committee members, but that isn't possible with the polls on ESB. There are some polling sites that might work out for us on this, but I'm happy to hear suggestions.
Another thought is that we could have posters select a Witness (non-voter) whose integrity is unquestioned on the board. That way, committee members could send their Yes or No votes to me and copy them to the Witness, to ensure legitimacy. Better yet, we could select a series of Witnesses either as an ongoing thing or per month, and I wouldn't always have to be involved.
The Witnesses could post the application results on the board themselves. However it works, I think allowing voters to make these decisions anonymously is key.



This Constitution was drafted in order to provide a framework for ESB Official Rankings.
After the initial 24 voters are selected, they will partake in a special vote to ratify this Constitution. Ratification requires an 80% acceptance among members, and if it fails to pass, any lingering issues should be addressed immediately. Voting on rankings cannot begin until the Constitution has been affirmed.


The Constitution may be altered on voting Sunday by special vote, included on each poster's Rankings ballot. To bring a proposed amendment to vote, 5% of the membership must formally endorse the issue's inclusion on the next ballot.
To pass, a proposed amendment must receive an 80% approval from members.
Lampley is offline  Top
Reply With Quote

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic 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 05:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015