Why do you need to rank outside of say the top 20? If there is nothing that works, don't rank them. It's better than having a system that doesn't work.
The ratings are decreased for moving up to higher weight divisions by the square of the reciprocal ratio of the weights limits of the divisions--and they are increased by the same factor for moving down the divisions. This makes no sence??
Yes, it's so **** you can't figure it out. Don't worry about it. No one will ever agree on ratings which is part of the romance of it all, I suppose.
FWIW I agree with Grant, ranking boxers isn't a mathematical problem so trying to refine the formula still isn't going to give results anywhere near as good as the unbiased opinion of boxing experts. The mathematical system is able to rank 1000s of fighters automatically but at the expense of being inaccurate at the top end (1-20) which is the important part. Do we need to know who the 78th ranked featherweight in the world is? Or is it more important that we get the top 10 "right"?* *(rhetorical question!!!)
Yes I'd like to know who the 78th best featherweight in the world is. While you're at it can you find out the 56th best strawweight.
stop being a smart ass McNielly and try and explain it to me. I am genuinley trying to come up with ideas of how to improve the rankings like you asked, and i genuinley don't udnerstand this part.
Hey, I'm no mathematician. All I know is that number crunchers who are and who know what they're doing have spent a lot of time on it. If you don't understand the formulae being used, I find it hard to see how you can offer improvements...but go for it. Have a go at posting in the 'Records' section of the forum. Best not tell them you think the system is bent though.
It would be hard to alter it too much. The biggest change I would make is incorporating the scorecards at the time of a stoppage - a lucky KO gets you more points than a shutout. An issue then is that scorecards don't always reflect the outcome of a fight - was Williams vs Martinez a shutout? One of the scorecards was similar to Pacquiao vs Clottey.... yet one was a hiding and the other a razor thin contest. No hard and fast rules, it's all subjective.
Its the fact that formulae are being used at all thats causing the problems in the ratings, not the specifics of the maths. If I came across someone knocking a nail into a plank of wood with a saw, I wouldn't suggest he uses a better saw.
That's fair comment. Perhaps you think that the human route is better - totally understandable. But in that case you would get some ****er selling you a hammer that didn't work, or telling you to use it upside down, or saying '**** the nail', etc, etc. There's no right or wrong in my opinion - just different approaches.