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

Are you being sarcastic?

 

Someone on another forum asked how my system could have Gonzalez above Mares before they fought, so I'll repost what I posted there. I tried to find out by looking at the records of Mares, Gonzalez and the top feathers to come up with a rough estimate. When I can get enough help to come up with a full initial top-30 of one division, I'll be able to add on the ranking points and do a full test of what my ranking system would come up with. But for now, here's a ROUGH ESTIMATE of what the top of featherweight COULD look like with my system...


This might be a bit confusing, but let's compare their records...

Mares of course had just the one win over Ponce De Leon at featherweight. He's usually given a lot of credit for that win, but...

Ponce in the previous three years had fought several fights over the weight, and the only top-30 feather opponents he fought were Escalante and Gonzalez. I see at the time Escalante had recently moved up from junior feather, but I'll give him credit for a number 20 ranking. Going into the Ponce-Gonzalez fight, Ponce would have just 22 points. I'll estimate that would give Ponce a number 9 ranking. Gonzalez had been fighting exclusively at feather since late 2009 and was pretty active, but the only opponent of his who would definitely have ranking points at feather would be Mtagwa. I'll give Mares the benefit for this comparison and assume Rojas wouldn't be top-30. If I guess Mtagwa would be number 14, that win would give Gonzalez 34 points. I'll estimate that the 12 point difference would give Gonzalez a number 6 ranking. Ponce beating Gonzalez would then leave Ponce with 72 points and Gonzalez with 56 points. I'm going to guess that Salido and Juanma would be numbers 1 and 2, and Mikey Garcia would be number 3 (he wouldn't be above Salido or have earned a vacant championship because Salido was the only top-10 opponent he fought). So based on what I think are reasonable estimates, with my system Ponce would be number 4 and Gonzalez number 5 before they each fought Mares. For beating Ponce Mares would have 54 points.

So it would be number 5 Gonzalez (56 points) vs number 6 Mares (54 points). The points are close and they could of course be different so I admit I shouldn't have been so confident Gonzalez would be higher, but if Gonzalez got points for beating Rojas or anyone else it wouldn't be close. Taking Garcia's victory over Juanma and Gonzalez's victory over Mares into account, the featherweight rankings would then be... 1. Garcia, 2. Gonzalez (106 points), 3. Lopez, 4. Salido, 5. Mares (80 points), 6. Ponce De Leon (72 points). Maybe I might have missed others, but Chris John hasn't fought anyone decent the last three years so he'd be lower. Again these are estimates, but they seem pretty likely. Don't tell me having Lopez number 3 makes my system siht: he'd be given credit for fighting Mikey and Salido twice, but he'd be overtaken by Salido even if he loses to Cruz.

Notice that Gonzalez was able to move up a full three spots for facing the number 6 contender, while Mares was rewarded for fighting the number 5 contender and moved up one spot despite losing. My system would reward quality of opposition more than any opinion-based rankings.

 

I made a new forum! To discuss the ranking system I've proposed, then of course to post updates.

I decided instead of polling dozens of people to get the first top-30, I'm going to try just averaging out the top-30 rankings of Boxrec and the IBO (filling in the four alphabet titlist the IBO doesn't rank based on their TBRB rank).

I'll compile a top-30 with that method at welterweight, then do a test by adding the ranking points from fights from the last three years. Once the system's running we'll need more help maintaining the rankings, but to do that you'll only need to know how to use boxrec and a calculator. If you're willing to help maintain the site, I'll also share the forum admin password with you. Who's interested?

 

I'm not interested anymore in debating with people who are convinced subjective rankings are necessary. Bashing the very idea of objective rankings will not be welcome in the ranking system sections, but there's also a general boxing section, which is completely open. So stop by for a chat

www.worldboxingrankings.proboards.com

 

Check out my site for what my first welterweight ranking looks like...

 

Initial top-30 rankings for heavyweight to light welterweight are now posted! This is really falling into place nicely, and I suspect by within a few months it will produce rankings more strictly based on accomplishments than any other rankings. Check it out and let me know what you think...

www.worldboxingrankings.proboards.com

 

The rankings are set and official for all divisions and the ranking system is set to cover the fights in September! Take a look... www.worldboxingrankings.proboards.com

 

This was so hypothetical that I maybe shouldn't have bothered. But the reason the system MIGHT have Lopez above Salido is that it would still give credit to Lopez for a fight or two before he fought Salido. And before their first fight Lopez was almost a pound for pound guy, while Salido was regarded as closer to a journeyman and had mixed success whenever he stepped up in class. But Salido would be close at worst and I'm only guessing, he might have surpassed Juanma in the second fight.

 

Yes, the one fair criticism is you'd get too much credit for losing, and a gatekeeper would be higher ranked than it seems he deserves. I think a system that deducted points for losses on a sliding scale would result in almost exactly the same rankings, except that losses wouldn't be rewarded... yet quality wins also wouldn't be rewarded as much. Without weighting wins as heavily as I do, top fighters wouldn't be given quite as much credit and would be too close to 10-25 ranked fighters. On balance, I think it's better to have a gatekeeper at around number 25 rather than an unbeaten prospect who's only beaten one fringe contender.

If you support the general idea, please check out the new forum. The system's been fine-tuned and I'm now happy enough with it that it's ready to start. I'd love help calculating and maintaining the rankings. I was thinking one person could be responsible for one division. It would just take about an hour every two weeks. I can't do 17 divisions on my own.

www.worldboxingrankings.proboards.com

 

In the last month the initial rankings were settled, and there's been further debate and clarification about the system's methods. The first updates are now posted for heavyweight and welterweight, and the rest will be posted by the 1st. I do need to note that the rankings should not be taken as authoritative in the early stages, but could take a full three years to flesh out, though sooner if ranked fighters fight each other more often.

The TBRB recently added their rules in Spanish, so I'm thinking of soon adding our rules in Spanish, French, German, Russian, Tagalog, Japanese, and Thai (haha).

Take a look, and if you think objective rankings are worthwhile leave any constructive criticism you have. If you support the project as it stands, we're still looking for more help maintaining the rankings. I'm hoping this can be shared between 17 people, with one person managing each division. Again, if you're dead set against the idea, please keep your comments on ESB.

http://worldboxingrankings.proboards.com/

 

In the last month the initial rankings were settled, and there's been further debate and clarification about the system's methods. The first updates are now posted for heavyweight and welterweight, and the rest will be posted by the 1st. I do need to note that the rankings should not be taken as authoritative in the early stages, but could take a full three years to flesh out, though sooner if ranked fighters fight each other more often.

The TBRB recently added their rules in Spanish, so I'm thinking of soon adding our rules in Spanish, French, German, Russian, Tagalog, Japanese, and Thai (haha).

Take a look, and if you think objective rankings are worthwhile leave any constructive criticism you have. If you support the project as it stands, we're still looking for more help maintaining the rankings. I'm hoping this can be shared between 17 people, with one person managing each division. Again, if you're dead set against the idea, please keep your comments on ESB.

http://worldboxingrankings.proboards.com/

Read much?