Boxrec have Oscar as no.2 WW of all time

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by ishy, Apr 15, 2009.


  1. ishy

    ishy Loyal Member Full Member

    44,755
    7
    Mar 9, 2008
  2. eliqueiros

    eliqueiros Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,344
    7
    Oct 25, 2007
    I don't think we will get any "true" assessment of the man until a few years when passions die down. Right now he sucked the worst in history or he was the best. I'm sure that rating is just a "hats off" to the guy.
     
  3. El Puma

    El Puma between rage and serenity Full Member

    4,310
    2
    Jan 8, 2006
    Oh for the love of.........
     
  4. Pimp C

    Pimp C Too Much Motion Full Member

    122,922
    34,957
    Jun 23, 2005
  5. El Puma

    El Puma between rage and serenity Full Member

    4,310
    2
    Jan 8, 2006
    Spot on.
     
  6. Pimp C

    Pimp C Too Much Motion Full Member

    122,922
    34,957
    Jun 23, 2005
    There's not that much hats off in the world to rank him over Hearns, SRL and Pea Whitaker, that's criminal.:deal
     
  7. El Puma

    El Puma between rage and serenity Full Member

    4,310
    2
    Jan 8, 2006
    Oh **** it, I'm going to do this one in proper General Forum fashion.



    Prime Oscar stops Lil Floyd, decisions Hearns and Leonard and Napoles. Wide decision.


    Oscar stops an overated Duran on bodyshots.:smoke
     
  8. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    36,206
    11,246
    Jan 6, 2007
    The topic of BoxRec's rankings keeps coming up.

    BoxRec's rankings are based on an algorithm (mathematical formula) that calculates the quality of each win based on the resume of the beaten fighter, the duration of the fight, the margin of victory and several other variables. The info is just fed into a computer and rankings are spewed out the other end.

    It doesn't consider other intangibles, or special circumstances. Therefore, it's not really meant to be like RING's list, or your list, however you compile it.

    The algorithmic approach works very well for chess rankings, reasonably well for Tennis, but quite poorly for boxing.

    In chess and in tennis, this kind of thing works better because generally, if A can beat B, and B can beat C, then A can beat C.

    In boxing, that's often NOT the case.

    It should be treated in that light.

    It's not meant to be taken as a serious measure of greatness.
     
  9. Kid Cuba

    Kid Cuba Boxing Junkie banned

    7,712
    0
    Feb 16, 2009
    Boxrec's 5 greatists Welterweights of all time

    1. Jose Napoles (Cuba)

    2. Oscar De La Hoya (U.S.)

    3. Thomas Hearns (U.S.)

    4. Emile Griffith (U.S. Virgin Islands)

    5. 'Sugar' Ray Leonard (U.S.)

    Looks right to me.
     
  10. cuchulain

    cuchulain Loyal Member Full Member

    36,206
    11,246
    Jan 6, 2007
    I would pick prime Oscar over little Floyd.


    But Hearns and Leonard ?

    Not unless the moon was a deep shade of blue !
     
  11. Pimp C

    Pimp C Too Much Motion Full Member

    122,922
    34,957
    Jun 23, 2005
    :patsch
     
  12. thewoo

    thewoo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,769
    4
    Mar 3, 2005
    Funy I don't remember seeing the announcement about golden boy buying bxorec.
     
  13. Kid Cuba

    Kid Cuba Boxing Junkie banned

    7,712
    0
    Feb 16, 2009
    Enlighten me then, who are your top five? (on 2nd thought how isint Sweet pea on the top 5?)
     
  14. El Puma

    El Puma between rage and serenity Full Member

    4,310
    2
    Jan 8, 2006
    Quite right, I am being far too generous as Oscar would stop those two glass jawed yokels inside 7 rounds.




    ;)
     
  15. El Puma

    El Puma between rage and serenity Full Member

    4,310
    2
    Jan 8, 2006
    SweetPea was past prime at 147 and Griffith?????:nono