Boxrec got Mitchell at world #5

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by Journey Man, Jul 17, 2011.


  1. rooq

    rooq Rooq's Boxing Promoter Full Member

    12,353
    0
    Jan 16, 2007
    Boxrec rankings are supposed to be purely formula driven but for some reason british boxers always appear to get ranked too high.
     
  2. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    61,460
    38
    Jan 7, 2005
    I'm not sure about that rooq but big winning records in average company tend to favoured too much over records with more losses in better company.
     
  3. harvinmagler

    harvinmagler Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,297
    0
    Nov 26, 2009
    Exactly, just look at the SMW rankings as a prime example.
     
  4. Jonsey

    Jonsey Boxing Junkie banned

    11,130
    0
    May 17, 2011
    title fights also gain you extra points. in the us or mexico they dont have as many regional belts etc. so a guy like kell brook has has 10 12 rounders and the us fighter will still be on 10s, even if the level of oppo is the same or worse on brooks record.
     
  5. lefthook82

    lefthook82 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,649
    724
    May 1, 2009
    in reality, i guess it doesn't matter. Shpuld be interesting to see if Waren trusts Mitchell again to pull out all the stops or if he will be sent as an away offering like jennings/lockett etc
     
  6. KingCobra

    KingCobra IBF World Champion Full Member

    5,933
    0
    Jun 29, 2009

    I reckon ****** will give him another bite of the cherry.
     
  7. StWerburghs

    StWerburghs Active Member Full Member

    1,033
    14
    Mar 11, 2006
    If rankings are pointless, how do you suggest title shots are decided?

    I agree most of them are ****, but thats the downfall of not having a single set of rankings for each weight.

    The only reason Mitchel is now ranked so highly, is because he beat an over-rated Murray, who was ranked far too high. Mitchel now has to be there or there abouts because of beating Murray.

    The question should be, how did Murray get so high in the first place?
     
  8. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    61,460
    38
    Jan 7, 2005
    See my post above StW, Murray had the type of record, long, unbeaten (even if it is against less than top level opponents) that the Boxrec formula seems to "like".
     
  9. jc

    jc Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,971
    14
    Sep 9, 2004
    Boxrec rankings are not very good.

    Kevin Mitchell isnt a world class lightweight.
     
  10. StWerburghs

    StWerburghs Active Member Full Member

    1,033
    14
    Mar 11, 2006
    Rankings of current active fighters should be based on recent activity, not early wins. Those early wins should of only propelled them through the lower rankings. Boxrec is bad enough, but the WBO had Murray at #3 I think. They certainly shouldnt be ranking on overall career.
     
  11. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    61,460
    38
    Jan 7, 2005
    What was Murrays WBO ranking before he changed promoters?
     
  12. StWerburghs

    StWerburghs Active Member Full Member

    1,033
    14
    Mar 11, 2006
    :D I dont know, probably 25th.
     
  13. Scottrf

    Scottrf Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,547
    0
    May 1, 2010
    Why do people continue to question a computerised ranking. Of course some will be off.
     
  14. GazOC

    GazOC Guest Star for Team Taff Full Member

    61,460
    38
    Jan 7, 2005
    Then why use that method?
     
  15. Scottrf

    Scottrf Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,547
    0
    May 1, 2010
    Because it's a statistical website: they are using their assets; a massive database of boxing records.