Boxrec's P4P list is really bad!!

Considering today's rankings are based on the rankings of all boxers since Adam... here's the BoxRec list of top 10 Heavies... It's not a perfect list but it's not bad.

1 Muhammad Ali
2 Jack Johnson
3 Joe Louis
4 Evander Holyfield
5 Harry Wills
6 Joe Frazier
7 Floyd Patterson
8 Sam Langford
9 Larry Holmes
10 Ezzard Charles

 

Holyfield 4? I don't think so, and no Lennox :huh

 

What do you people not understand. It's a computer rating system, it's not real, no one personal picks it.

Jesus, you guys freak out over stupid ****.

 

P4P lists are all subjective really...I'm sure if you posted yours we'd call it stupid too.

At the same time though we're just posters on a lil message board...Boxrec is the go to sites for boxing...so a P4P list where the general consensus #1 is around 8 and a guy whose 3-3 in his last six fights (B-Hop) is #2 is pretty outlandish.

 

yes, it's not perfect and i ponder some of the rankings as well....
:think
holyfield possibly because of his wins over douglas, bowe, tyson, foreman, moorer, holmes...all ranked high at the time.

lennox is ranked 12th. possibly because his competition by the time he showed up was weaker then holyfields, his legacy being 2 wins over holyfield and a prime vitali, the rest were guys still raw or had slipped in the ranked by the time he fought them. don't forget it's based on caliber of opponents and quality of win, so a fighter making his legacy in a weak era will rank lower, as is the case with Holmes.

one thing I find flawed with the system is that it rewards winning back-to-back rematches against highly ranked foes. Vasquez ranked so high after twice beating a highly ranked Marquez... Pavlik twice beating the guy that twice beat a very highly rated Hopkins...
it does truily lack the human touch!

but overall it has many redeaming qualities, it shows us that sometimes that we may be completely overestimating a guy or gives credible proof that an ABC organization ranks a fighter too highly. Most organizations have a guy like Arreola in the top 5 of their rankings and already anointed the savior of american boxing - yet according to boxrec he barely grazes into the top20... coincidence? at Cruiser the Cunningham and Adamek fight is too close to call.. boxrec has the two ranked within 20 points of eachother which is the equivalent of a hair.... coincidence?

yeah, so what i mean to say is that it's a program and only as good as its limitation. :thumbsup

 

Boxrec doesn't watch the fights it calculates...so I find it hard to find this assumption that Boxrec grasp of its rankings hold strong and true...

 

I think Margo is a tad bit too high...I'd have him at 5 or 6

 

you have margo that high :-(

 

It sucks becasue its a computer ranking systems that is heavily weighted by the records of the fighters and the records of the fighters that they fought and the records of the fighters that the fighters they fought fought and so on...

Example If a fighter beat 10 fighters that sucked but had and aveage record of 31-3 that fighters ranking would be higher then a fighter that fought 10 fights with two of them being p4p to 10 guys because the ten guys he fought has an average record of 24-6.

Caballero move in thier ranking for beatting Moliter will be greater the Oscars after he beat Pac, cuz Moliter has a better record then Pac.

 

Great point,,,,,I think wlad should be at 5, an ricky ''the holder" hatton shouldn't even be in the top 15, :yep

 

I understand PAC should be # one or two but putting him in 8th. ONLY INSANE people would agree on this!

 

I agree it's a total farce.

Here's my P4P

1. David Haye
2. Enzo Maccarinelli
3. Joe Calzaghe
4. Carl Froch
5. Audley Harrison
6. Ricky Hatton
7. W. Klitschko
8. V. Klitschko
9. Bernard Hopkins
10. Oscar De La Hoya