A points ranking system to legitimise boxing rankings and championships!!

I emailed my first post to TBRB and posted it on their website. Can't wait to hear how they'll reply. The revolution awaits...

 

Just pushing this to the top of the page before I call it a night...

 

The following post rendered what used to be here irrelevant...

 

...

 

This is no longer just a hypothetical idea. This **** is happening! I'll be hitting every other boxing forum tomorrow, and I want help! Please leave any constructive criticism, and let me know if you support the idea, or even better want to be part of it. This shouldn't just be one person's project, it will take a staff just to calculate the rankings points. But the first task will be to figure out how to compile initial top-30 rankings, and that will take a few weeks. The new world boxing rankings now even have an email contact:

This content is protected

Vivre la revolution!!!

 

I have been writing down everything I mentioned here in a cleaner form myself. And of course when this becomes official all aspects of the system and its rules would be published and clearly outlined online. It's just a rough idea, that needs to be fine-tuned.

I'm not attempting to apply anything from the tennis system that isn't relevant to boxing. I just think the idea of ranking based on the last three year's accomplishments (compared with one year in tennis), and on quality of opposition (compared with levels of success in different levels of tournaments in tennis) is sensible. The idea about an injury exemption I mentioned but obviously wasn't insisting on. Understanding the specifics of the tennis system isn't necessary to appreciate the two main thrusts of my comparison. No ranking system will be perfect, but an objective ranking system should be discussed and considered for boxing.

Of course making initial rankings from other data or personal opinions is problematic. Does anyone have other ideas? As I mentioned the objective points ranking will iron out any subjective inconsistencies that were used first.

Don't mistake my enthusiasm for belief that this will be easy. I'm aware that boxing's problems are so deep that such a system would be extremely difficult.

 

Like I mentioned, the boxrec system is far too complex (rewarding points for method of victory, etc), which is why I prefer the general idea I've proposed. But here are their rules...

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Bo...gs_Description

 

I explained it in my first post, haha. Because all rankings are just personal opinion, and the personal opinion of whichever bull**** organisation who happened to rank Wilder top 10 was obviously uninformed. There are two options if you aren't happy that rankings are inaccurate: you can make your own rankings, or you can help make an objective ranking system

 

Yeah, the concept of a mandatory challenger was only invented because it was an easy sell to promoters. Of course I think objective rankings are the only viable alternative because even a collective of the 'best' opinions will be inherently compromised by subjectivity.

Am I not getting enough interest because fans have just accepted that the state of the game is so ****ed that no one should bother even thinking it might be better?

 

If anyone else feels my points ranking system is not simple enough please let me know, and I'll either explain it or change it with your help.

 

I updated the overview of my ranking system proposal on my first post. I trimmed the fat, added a couple points, and simplified the writing.