Dumb things about boxrec

Besides the ranking that's the same problem I have with it too.Damn Boxing Record rangers.:-(

 

the only thing missing is how they fall off in the early 1900's. by now they should have that filled in and have all the known fights down to the 1720's catalogued. of course their would be a lot of unkown names there, along with dates and locations but it would still be useful.

 

I don't like them having the female ratings on the front page. It's a bit of pointless political correctness. I bet less than 1% of people who use Boxrec have any interest in female fighters.

 

what also should be noted it is largely a volunteer based program. I was an editor there a long time ago, but have only made a few entries. If people are really interested in getting the older fights in there email them and ask for a password and get to work.

 

Its also rarely accurate when listing upcomming fight dates and fights.

 

Gott love the boxrec game...



I was showing in a post how John Ruiz would beat Ali (no I was not serious )....Seeing as how he beat Golota, who beat McBride, who beat Tyson, who beat Berbick, who beat Ali.....

Again, gotta love the boxrec game....:thumbsup

 

So you maybe wanna be the first one who solve my puzle:

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=14086

 

Yep, any game that you can fairly easily show Chuck Gardner should of beaten Bruno is fun.