Don't get me wrong, it does hold an encyclopedic record of stats that would be hard to find anywhere else. But it has some bonehead stuff on it. For example: it does not take a fighter off of its ranking until they have been inactive for a year. Which means that 49 year old Tony Tubbs is still a ranked fighter. Should he really be above Javier Mora and Humberto Soto? Makes no sense...
You know you have the single best handle in all of ESB. I think a wonderful addition would be the inclusion of how many times a fighter is down and in what rounds in a particular fight. They do it for some, but not many at all. Attendance figures and a search by trainer would be nice as well.
It's computer rankings. It's the best system we have for keeping track of fighters, so you can either use it or not, boxrec I'm sure doesn't give a **** what you do.
I learned early on not to use boxrec for rankings. It is a wonderful tool for checking records and looking at title lineages. I can get lost for hours doing that ****.
I love Boxrec as a concept and check it frequently. Their rankings system doesn't bother me because I ignore it, but I do wish they'd be more judicious about listing fights on the schedule. A lot threads get started over here because someone saw a scheduled bout listed over there that doesn't actually exist.
Boxrec is good for what it is. A great place to find hard to find info. Wins, losses and draws. The worst part about it is when people use it to pretend like they know what they are actually talking about.......like. "If Pernell Whitaker was so good, why did he get schooled by Jose Luis Ramirez?" If its used correctly, it can be quite useful.....but when people abuse it, like above, I start to wish noone knew about it.
Very true. Although usually you can see through those people. I think my favorite aspect of Boxrec is the way you can zig and zag around among different eras in about three clicks. Emile Griffith is one of my favorite "portal" guys.