How much different do your "historic" rankings compare with your head to head ranking

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Johnstown, Feb 17, 2013.


Page 1 of 2
  1. Johnstown

    Johnstown Boxing Addict banned

    5,695
    12
    Aug 30, 2010
    I can understand the difference.....you might feel that Marcanio did more in his career than say Tyson, and hence deserves a higher ranking, yet you might feel that Tyson would win in a fight between the two due to having almost 40 pounds on the Rock and some other factors.

    Anyhow, how different are your historic rankings as compared to your pound for pound ranking.
     
    Johnstown, Feb 17, 2013
    Johnstown, Feb 17, 2013
    #1
  2. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    80,811
    21,401
    Sep 15, 2009
    totally different.

    h2h my top 5 is

    robinson
    pea
    jones jr
    armstrong
    duran

    atg my top 5 is

    robinson
    greb
    armstrong
    fitzsimmons
    langford
     
    lufcrazy, Feb 17, 2013
    lufcrazy, Feb 17, 2013
    #2
  3. Vic-JofreBRASIL

    Vic-JofreBRASIL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,603
    4,979
    Aug 19, 2010
    I always rate the level of ability first. Then evaluate the resume....Resume is more important, but I evaluete the resume based in the ability of the opponents....know what I mean ?
     
    Vic-JofreBRASIL, Feb 17, 2013
    Vic-JofreBRASIL, Feb 17, 2013
    #3
  4. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,541
    27,158
    Feb 15, 2006
    I consider resume to be backed by a higher level of proof than head to head.

    Therfore if fighter A has a better resume, it will buy them some benefit of the doubt in a fantasy fight with fighter B.
     
    janitor, Feb 17, 2013
    janitor, Feb 17, 2013
    #4
  5. Vic-JofreBRASIL

    Vic-JofreBRASIL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,603
    4,979
    Aug 19, 2010
    What define a good resume would be an interesting question......IMO is the level of ability of your opponents during your career, that´s what define a great resume. Using that criteria, you actually are rating ability before resume.....
     
    Vic-JofreBRASIL, Feb 17, 2013
    Vic-JofreBRASIL, Feb 17, 2013
    #5
  6. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    473
    Oct 6, 2004
    how do you do a head to head pound for pound list without it being dominated by heavyweights:?

    Is it a mythical concept of all fighters being the same size for eg.
     
    Boilermaker, Feb 17, 2013
    Boilermaker, Feb 17, 2013
    #6
  7. Shake

    Shake Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,633
    58
    May 4, 2007
    They have to be. Matching fighters from different era's is in inherently unfair. You adapt to beat and thrive in your era. If there's a huge fighter in 20 years that has slow feet but is impossible to outslug, should we discredit Tyson for that? Not in a historic sense. That could only happen if every fighter was tested for the same exact difficulty. Circumstances were there first, then the fighter that thrived in them.

    Head to head is another matter.
     
    Shake, Feb 18, 2013
    Shake, Feb 18, 2013
    #7
  8. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    80,811
    21,401
    Sep 15, 2009
    no **** the same size argument that's a concept I hate (even more than triangle theory) it's just a ranking on the eye test.
     
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    #8
  9. Johnstown

    Johnstown Boxing Addict banned

    5,695
    12
    Aug 30, 2010
    yeah but you can't really do head to head with pound for pound..at least not..head to head between say Joe Louis and Floyd Mayweather..the best you can do is say....Floyd would win.., lets say he has 10 fights against each other all time great 147 pounder, and you say 90% of all fights against all time great 147 pounders (just putting in a bull**** percentage, dont hold me to that). But Louis would be 94% wins with 10 fights against all time great heavyweights.....
     
    Johnstown, Feb 18, 2013
    Johnstown, Feb 18, 2013
    #9
  10. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    80,811
    21,401
    Sep 15, 2009
    Well that's not what I mean when I say h2h p4p. I'm talking about purely skill level.

    When I see wlad and I see Jones I can safely consider Jones a better fighter, despite safely picking wlad to knock him out.
     
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    #10
  11. Johnstown

    Johnstown Boxing Addict banned

    5,695
    12
    Aug 30, 2010
    yeah but...hmmmmmmm......how is that different than your historic rankings.
     
    Johnstown, Feb 18, 2013
    Johnstown, Feb 18, 2013
    #11
  12. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    80,811
    21,401
    Sep 15, 2009
    take an easy example

    historically I have fitz as much greater than whittaker.
    based on skill level I have whittaker much greater than fitz.

    I did show my top 5 for them both.
     
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    #12
  13. Johnstown

    Johnstown Boxing Addict banned

    5,695
    12
    Aug 30, 2010
    Makes sense...although, i think comparing skills between different size guys is hard business. Smaller guys always seem more skilled..just having less bulk allows you to move in more ways, you tend to be faster, all those things lead to at least the appearance of more skills.
     
    Johnstown, Feb 18, 2013
    Johnstown, Feb 18, 2013
    #13
  14. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    80,811
    21,401
    Sep 15, 2009
    tis tricky business that's why I don't put much stock in it :good
     
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    lufcrazy, Feb 18, 2013
    #14
  15. turbotime

    turbotime Hall Of Famer Full Member

    42,536
    3,739
    May 4, 2012
    I don't know why people have such a hard time understanding the different concepts.
     
    turbotime, Feb 18, 2013
    turbotime, Feb 18, 2013
    #15
Page 1 of 2