breaking down this heavyweight era and others: Why today stinks!!

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by JAB5239, Dec 5, 2013.


Page 31 of 59
  1. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Fight was 2008, he was never #9 in any annual list.

    [url]http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/The_Ring_Magazine%27s_Annual_Ratings:_2007[/url]

    Year before was 2007:


    Title Vacant
    1. [url]Wladimir Klitschko[/url]
    2. [url]Samuel Peter[/url]
    3. [url]Oleg Maskaev[/url]
    4. [url]Ruslan Chagaev[/url]
    5. [url]Nikolay Valuev[/url]
    6. [url]Sultan Ibragimov[/url]
    7. [url]Serguei Lyakhovich[/url]
    8. [url]Vladimir Virchis[/url]
    9. [url]Tony Thompson[/url]
    10. [url]Alexander Povetkin[/url]
     
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    #451
  2. JAB5239

    JAB5239 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,470
    58
    Feb 23, 2008
    Most of those guys won't fall under this era. Personally I think the next era will be worse.
     
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    #452
  3. m8te

    m8te Oh you ain't know? Full Member

    10,224
    2
    May 28, 2009
    why? how could an era filled with matchups between the guys I mentioned be a bad one? you dont think they will fight each other? you dont think theyre that good?
     
    m8te, Jan 23, 2014
    m8te, Jan 23, 2014
    #453
  4. JAB5239

    JAB5239 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,470
    58
    Feb 23, 2008
    No and no. ANYONE can check these rankings. Lol though at WBO champion like that means anything.
     
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    #454
  5. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    And see you made up lower rankings for Chambers and Sultan.
     
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    #455
  6. JAB5239

    JAB5239 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,470
    58
    Feb 23, 2008
    For the stuff you posted. My work is easily checked. If I made a few minor mistakes (like you did with the Peter claim) than so be it. **** happens. I said from go this wasn't perfect. But it still a very good gauge to compare eras. Seem you now want to tear it down because you can't argue it.
     
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    #456
  7. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    -What stuff? I gave you the link to a thread that had a bunch of links to back up the Maricano ratings.

    -I thought you used a different year for Peter and I was mistaken.

    -Well, for someone arrogantly claiming the numbers don't lie and asking for links, it looks bad on your part. Especially when said "minor mistakes" skewer the data to the advantage of your argument.
     
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    #457
  8. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Klitschko was ranked #2 by [url]The Ring Magazine[/url] and Gomez was ranked #9.
    [url]http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:1379305[/url]

    Klitschko entered as [url]The Ring Magazine[/url] # 1 heavyweight contender and Solis was the #10 contender.
    [url]http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:1569182[/url]
     
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    #458
  9. JAB5239

    JAB5239 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,470
    58
    Feb 23, 2008
    No you claimed I intentionally skewered the numbers. Mistakes happen as you found out with the Peter one. I never claimed to be perfect. You can probably find mistakes for other fighters too. This was something I put together in a night. It doesn't change the overall point of the thread though, so no matter how much you try to discredit me, you can't change that.
     
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    #459
  10. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    This is a huge back step from you stance earlier in the thread. You expressed strong conviction the numbers were right and well researched.
     
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    #460
  11. bremen

    bremen Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,843
    196
    Oct 11, 2010
    [url]http://www.boxing-monthly.co.uk/content/9903/ratings.htm[/url]

    #6: Herbie Hide (Britain), 31-1, WBO champ

    [url]http://www.boxing-monthly.co.uk/content/0412/ratings.htm[/url]

    #9: Danny Williams (GB), 32-3

    :hi:
     
    bremen, Jan 23, 2014
    bremen, Jan 23, 2014
    #461
  12. JAB5239

    JAB5239 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,470
    58
    Feb 23, 2008
    By using anything other than the annual ranking you're making this unfair for every fighter lister there for Solis ranking while true at the time cannot be used. If you could do this for every fighter and who they fought it would be fair. You can't, so its not. Obviously we both know mistakes can be made as proven on both our parts, but my system is designed to be as fair as possible to every fighter.
     
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    #462
  13. JAB5239

    JAB5239 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,470
    58
    Feb 23, 2008
    Again, you're to stupid to understand the premise of using one unified ranking. If you can't use YOUR ranking for every single fighter than the playing field is uneven. :patsch
     
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    JAB5239, Jan 23, 2014
    #463
  14. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    -You can dig and find the actual RING rankings for every fighter.

    -Well, I think the annual rankings are a good guide if you understand how they are supposed to be read. You do not, and as pointed out again and again, are using them incorrectly.

    Year Of=after the fight happened.
    Year Before=before the fight happened.

    If you are going to swear by the annual rankings, Year Before is the best way to go. It will produce the most accurate results.

    Annual Rankings for 2003
    #1 Vitali
    #3 Sanders

    This was the actual rankings for their 2004 fight and why Vitali was awarded the RING title.

    Annual Rankings for 2004
    #1 Vitali
    #9 Sanders

    After losing badly to Vitali and going inactive, Sanders starts to nosedivie out of the top 10.
     
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    The Mongoose, Jan 23, 2014
    #464
  15. bremen

    bremen Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,843
    196
    Oct 11, 2010
    You are grasping at the straws. Ring magazine updates rankings regularly throughout the year. There is no such thing as annual ring ranking anymore.
     
    bremen, Jan 23, 2014
    bremen, Jan 23, 2014
    #465
Page 31 of 59