Heavyweight Wx10 Universal Ranking System

I want a snappy acronym or initialism, I'm struggling.

ALOQ - Achievement Level by Opponent Quality
RQI - Resume Quality Index
RAT TOAR - Results Against Top Tier Opponents by Average Rating

I'll definitely want some place to save these ratings, since they are high effort. I have a bunch of one-off novelty websites already so it wouldn't exactly be a new thing for me to create.

I could also try to make a video, I do instruction YouTubes for work from time to time, but between work and a PhD sometimes my energy is little low.

 

I’d be happy to do videos and give you guys credit for all of the work on the system. I like RQI and URR, should I send the names to a group chat of fans I’m in to get their opinions?

 

I always do like to look at all the nuances myself.

At some point it’s also good to just stick to to objective data though. Otherwise all performances and measurement get lost in endless relative and subjective discussions.

It would be very exhausting to develop a system that measures every single point of that list.

But if the system would at least account for losses I think it would gain a lot of validity as far as ranking fighters goes. If anything from the above list is going to be implemented it should be losses first.

 

it's a good point but this study also required that the opponent be ranked by 2 of 3 independent bodies. which makes as much (or more) sense than using the sanctioning bodies. though I imagine if you required just 1 of the 3 independent bodies, or if you went by sanctioning bodies ranking, that many of these guys have in fact faced a lot of "top 10" opposition. however, since guys are on "tracks" to titles, there's maybe 50-100 "top 10" ranked fighters at a time between sanctioning bodies, independent bodies, boxrec and others.

 

So Wilder is fighting YOUR #8 rated heavyweight Helenius next.

But he'll get no credit for beating Helenius in your ratings because the orgs you think have the best ratings (two of which don't even include Tyson Fury in their ratings right now) don't rate Helenius in the top 10?



Brilliant system.

Why are people trying to prop up "independent" ratings bodies? Two of these groups don't even rank Tyson Fury currently. They still think he's "retired" and consider Usyk the champion.

So if someone beat Tyson Fury right now, since he's not rated in two of these three independent orgs, the winning fighter would get NO points?

They all have inaccurate ratings. I don't even think the Transnational one rated Wilder when Fury beat him the last time because Wilder had been out longer than 12 months.

They're all screwed up ... this one included, if your own rankings don't give someone credit for beating someone in YOUR OWN top 10.

 

URS is supposed to be used as a historical resume ranker rather than a ranker of fighters' at the moment H2H ability and place in the HW scene. It gives people an idea of what was going on at the time.

 

So, since Fury isn't ranked by two of those orgs, if someone beats him in December, they get no points for that?

How does that give people an idea of what's going on at the time?

 

Admittedly, the Fury situation is a bit of a conundrum. I would hope the average fan would be attentive enough to ask why Fury was excluded from somebody's win column, or at this point just read a few pages in the thread for an answer.

 

And why are cruiserweight wins included in a heavyweight ratings again?

Is it just because you guys want to give Usyk more points?

Are you telling me if some heavyweight fought Chris Billam Smith, who is rated in all cruiserweight rankings, that heavyweight would get credit for a top 10 win?

So a win over Joe Joyce gets you as many points as a win over Chris Billam Smith?