Boxrec - your thought's on this site

the link I was thinking of between liston and ebrell davidson was that big embrell knocked out LH marty marshal twice before Marty beat liston!

 

I guess they are linked more than either of us thought.

 

Boxrec is a verry valuable resource, but it has severe limitations.

It has been quite damaging in the sense that many novices think that it represents the absolute reality.

There are people out there who actualy belive that most of Jimmy Wildes opponents were fighting their profesional debut, and that some of them had obtained titles before their first profesional fight. Fighters in the lower weight classes, that were less reported suffer from "the curse of boxrec".

Jeff Clark was regarded by many people of the day, as the best middleweight of the era, yey until recently, he had a loosing record on boxrec!

 

The rankings are not the best, critics of the site focus on this too much.
Good database of boxers and matches. Some detale is given about the matchs.
It has its usses.

 

i'm surprised people focus on the rankings or forum. i mean boxrec is just a database with some extra things shoved on to it.

the extra's make no difference to me at all, i don't use their forum, i don't follow their rankings and i don't read their articles.

 

Great site, anyone on here who says otherwise is full of ****.

 

it is a good site for basic records and total rounds. I wish they had more statistics, but what they have is more than what many sites have. So I think they are a very good site.

 

i didnt even know it had a forum, i type a boxer's name in google and a link pops up to their record. Never looked around the website.

 

I go to their main page a lot and they've also got a nice bunch of headlines from all over. It's become a very nice all-around place.

 

boxrec is a great site serving a greater purpose.
Their forum is **** btw.
I take their stats as a way of finding fights i want to see and fighters i want to learn about .
Their height & reach are extremely exaggerated and should be deducted some 2-5 % in height stats and 4-6 % in reach stats .

 

Like Wikipedia, good for starting your research but you never should use that as one of your main sources.

 

When BoxRec 1st came out I found many mistakes, so I contacted them. They told me that they knew of me and would like for me to be one of there editors, as I was one of the editors for the Ring Record Book, But it didn't happen.

Several years went by, and they contacted me once again and finally made me one of them.

We have just over 100 editors from all over the World putting in results of bouts from years ago. Before BoxRec we just had 100+ boxing people collecting results on there own, now we put them together. 100+ is much better then 1.

As far as some fighters listed on boxrec having no fights, until someone finds fights on them, it will stay that way. The records are up-dated every several minutes, but it will be almost impossible, if not impossible, to find every fight there ever was.

 

Yup. I've been focusing most of my efforts on compiling the records of the early top contenders like Jack McClelland, Charley McKeever, Dave Holly, Patsy Brannigan, Harry Scroggs, Harry Lyons, etc. That way we can get an idea of the quality of the wins of Gans, Walcott, Langford, Ryan, Weir, Dempsey, etc.