Lineal Rankings System

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Boilermaker, Jul 12, 2010.


  1. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    1991
    1 Evander Holyfield - W Foreman Cooper
    2 Mike Tyson - W Ruddock
    3 Tim Witherspoon - W Williams Tucker
    4 Carl Williams - L Witherspoon NC Odum
    5 Trevor Berbick - W Lane
    6 Ray Mercer - W Damiani Morrison
    7 Tommy Morrison - Tillis, Thomas Mijangos Vaulin L Mercer
    8 Pinklon Thomas - L Morrisson
    9 George Foreman - W Ellis L Holyfield
    10 Adilson Rodriguez -W Gibaudo Garcia Tonacea Cea
    11 Donovan Ruddock - L Tyson
    12 Levi Billups - W Smith L Moorer (Pre rank)
    13 James Smith - W Carter Armstrong Odum Martin Sims Tillman Crowder L Billups
    14 Frank Bruno - W Emman
    15 Francesco Damiani - L Mercer
    16 Lennox Lewis W Mason Weaver McCrory Biggs
    17 Gary Mason - L Lewis
    18 Riddick Bowe - W Biggs Tubbs Marin Brown Seldon Tillery
    19 Tyrell Biggs -L Lewis Bowe
    20 Renaldo Snipes - No Fights
    21 Pierre Coetzer - W Lakusta Ribalta Halstead Murphy
    22 Corrie Sanders - W Gee Duplooy Rouse Card
    23 Johnny DuPlooy W Brown L Sanders
    24 Mike Weaver -L Lewis
    25 Tony Tubbs -L Bower
    26 Tony Tucker - W Washington Thomas Norris
    27 Bert Cooper - W Ross Nelson Wade Hipp L Holyfield
    28 Orlin Norris - W Howe Washington Shelby Pritchard L Tucker
    29 Michael Dokes - W Morton Armstrong
    30 Lionel Washington - L Tucker Norris
    31 Mark Wills - No fights
    32 Mike White - W Rouse Thomson Richardson Ryan
    33 Greg page - W Young Whitaker Christjohn
    34 Michael Moorer - W Davis Billups Stewart Crabtree
    35 Alex Stewart - W Wofford L Moorer

    Evander's Title defences not looking too good so far.

    Mike Tyson, as expected, went to prison as the true no 1 contender to Evanders Title.

    Tim Witherspoon a real surprise, coming in as the main contender to Evander behind Tyson.

    Trevor Berbick is a pretty surprising one. Not only would he finish up (before making a comeback) as a solid number 5. But when you look back at his career, he was a solid top 10 for most of his fights. One has to wonder whether Muhammed Ali deserves a touch more credit than he usually gets for the final fight of his career. Based on these ratings, Berbick is an underated fighter.

    James Bonecrusher Smith Was surprisingly active this year with about 8 fights for the year. Surprising that Levi Billups was the guy who actually beat him. Michael Moorer was unlucky not to earn a higher ranking as he ahd already beaten Billups.

    Lennox Jumps ahead of Riddick Bowe and well into the top 20.

    The Ratings might not suggest it, but there really was nothing wrong with Tyrell Biggs' competition this year. A loss to Lennox Lewis and Riddick Bowe!

    Interesting to see Wlad's Future conquerer, Corrie Sanders make his way into the rankings so early.

    Tony Tucker is a funny one. On the face, I would have thought of his 26 ranking as far too low. Yet strangely enough, the guys he is fighting are all around the 25 -30 mark! So the rankings, again, are probably more accurate than thought.
     
    choklab likes this.
  2. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    1992
    1 Riddick Bowe - W Nelson Martin Coetzere Holyfield
    2 Evander Holyfield - W Holmes L Bowe
    3 Tony Tucker - W Martin odum falkner Contreras mccall Poirer Swindell
    4 Everett Martin - L Moorer Bowe (pre rank) Tucker W Witherspoon
    5 Tim Witherspoon - W Smith Pritchard Martin Willis
    6 Alex Garcia W Crabtree Gans Evans Weathers White Brooks Occasio Jones
    7 Jerry Jones - W Fitch Williams L Garcia
    8 Carl Williams - W Tillman Occassio Smith L Jones
    9 Larry Holmes - W Mercer L Holyfield
    10 Ray Mercer - W Dixon halstead L Holmes
    11 Tommy Morrison - W Quarry Halstead Odum Tucker Hipp Tillman
    12 Pinklon Thomas - W Jackson Sutton Miller Jones Smith Wofford Davis Beilfuss Heins Nesbitt Burgess Owens Payne
    13 George Foreman - W Stewart
    14 Adilson Rodriguez -W Diaz Racette Cambiaso Dascola
    15 Lennox Lewis - W Billups Williams Dixon Ruddock
    16 Donovan Ruddock - W Page Jackson L Lewis
    17 Levi Billups - W Humm L Lewis
    18 Francesco Damiani - W Swindell Greer page
    19 Greg Page - W Smith Porter L Ruddock Damiani
    20 James Smith - W Wills Wofford L Page
    21 Frank Bruno - W Ribalta Coetzer
    22 Tyrell Biggs -W Jameson Woolard Faulkner Jobe Jones Wilson
    23 Renaldo Snipes - W Lane
    24 Pierre Coetzer - W West L Bowe Bruno
    25 Corrie Sanders - W Wade Dixon Evans Nielson
    26 Johnny DuPlooy No Fights
    27 Mike Weaver -W Gans
    28 Lionel Butler - W Atkins Perez Dixon Tubbs Morton
    29 Tony Tubbs -W Taylor Seldon Ferguson L Butler
    30 Michael Moorer W White Martin Cooper Wright
    31 Bert Cooper - W Coffee Jaco Papelli L Moorer
    32 Orlin Norris - W Hembrick McMurray Sewell
    33 Michael Dokes - Wstonewalker wofford Davis Sutton Ferguson Ribalta Forbes

    Riddick Bowe takes the world title. I could be mistaken, but with a ranking of number 18, this technically makes Riddick Bowes win over Evander as the second biggest upset in boxing era (outside Michael Spinks) and the era of needing to be a proven top 10 contender to get a title shot does seem to be finished, presumable with the Zero and eye candy/size test being the new measure. Although I guess we will see how things progress, maybe it is just Evanders early reign where he didn fight many top 10 fighters. George Foreman was the only top 10 fighter he faced.

    Mike Tyson starts his stint in jail. Will be interesting to see if his second career gets him any rankings.

    Maybe I am a little harsh on the Riddick defence. He does have a pre rankings win over Everett Martin who would go on to beat a top 10 fighter in Tim Witherspoon.

    Surprising that it is at this point, that Tony Tucker reaches a career high ranking (so far). Although he was very active. In hindsight I would have thought it was the mcCall win not the martin win that was the better win, but mcCall wasn’t even on the rankings.

    Michael Moorer was a little unluck his Everett Martin win wasn’t timed a little better.

    Trevor Berbick's 3 year retirement ends a really good and underated run as top 10 contender.

    Larry Holmes' return to the top 10 sees him as technically one of evanders better defences.

    Pinklon Thomas deserves serious credit. 12 fights in a year! Bit of a throwback with his level of activity.

    Tyrell Biggs certainly took on all comers. Last years Lewis Bowe fights were matched this year by fighting to unknown debutants! You cant get much opposite ends of the spectrum. Biggs really didn’t seem to care who he fought.

    It is quite clear and a little sad that the top contenders really seem to avoid each other, particularly in the top 10 to 30 range. The pattern seems to be get a win against lesser ranked opponents rather than fight somebody at the same level of development. I think it is a shame there are so many extra good fights that could have been made in this range that would have made things even more interesting than they were.
     
    choklab likes this.
  3. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    1993
    1 Evander Holyfield W Stewart Bowe
    2 Riddick Bowe - W Dokes Ferguson L Holyfield
    3 Lennox Lewis - W Tucker Bruno
    3 Tony Tucker - W Graves L Lewis
    4 Larry Holmes w Martin Papali Lacusta Poirer Ribalta
    5 Herbie Hide W Diaz Martin Halstead Martin
    6 Everett Martin - L Moorer Bowe (pre rank) Tucker W Witherspoon
    7 Tim Witherspoon - No Fights
    8 Phil Jackson - Woffard Millard Carter Dixon Gonzalez
    9 Buster Mathis Jr - Fortune Williams Billups Young Dixon Hunter
    10 Brian Nielson - Gaffney Weiss McKenzie Chanet Dixon
    11 Mike Dixon - W Garcia L Jackson Mathis Hide Nielson Mcall (prerank)
    12 Derek Williams - W Smith Robinson Wilson Nicholson Swindell Davis Young Fitch
    13 Garing Lane - W Payne L Williams
    14 Alex Garcia W Turner Curry Dixon L Dixon Lane
    15 Michael Bent W Wofford Wills Morrison
    16 Ray Mercer w Willis Wills Ferguson L Ferguson
    17 Mark Wills - W Jones Jones L Bent Mercer
    18 Alexander Zolkin W Williamson Jones L Tubbs Hunter (prerank)
    19 Jerry Jones - L Wills Zolkin
    20 Tommy Morrison - Williams Murphy Foreman Tomashenk L Bent
    21 Frank Bruno - W Williams L Lewis
    22 Carl Williams - L Morrisson Bruno
    23 Jesse Ferguson - W Mercer Pepeli L Bowe Mercer
    24 Lionel Butler - W Willis Payne Shelby Bullock Carter
    25 Lawrence Carter - W Thomas L Jackson Butler
    26 Pinklon Thomas - L Carter
    27 George Foreman - W Coetzer L Morrison
    28 Adilson Rodriguez -W Jaco Gonzales & others
    29 Donovan Ruddock - No Fights
    30 Corrie Sanders - Brooks Cooper Stevens Billups
    31 Levi Billups - W Fitch L Mathis Sanders
    32 Oliver McCall - Dixon Damian Card
    33 Francesco Damiani - L McCall
    34 Michael Moorer - Smith Swindell Pritchard & Others
    35 James Smith - W Tillery Tillman Jackson others L Moorer
    36 Mike Hunter - W Biggs Zolkin Coffee NC Mathis

    Riddick Bowe's reign lasts just the year. Outside of Holyfield, his challengers werent very impressive.

    Lewis' win over Tucker was a good win. It will be interesting to compare his early results with Riddick's. So far they are reasonably close and similar, despite Riddick having the Holyfield series.

    It is a little surprising to see Larry Holmes move straight back into the top 10. It is funny how the ATGs always seem to have no trouble fighting the best fighters and earning and maintaining their top rankings.

    AT First Clance Garcia's loss to Dixon was a shocker with the no of losses Dixon followed this win with. But you have to give some credit to Dixon. The guys who beat him all fought often and won often that year.

    Funny that Michael Bent's win over Tommy Morrisson was technically not his biggest win of the year. There does seem to be a slight blip in the rankings at the moment.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
    choklab likes this.
  4. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    1994
    1 George Foreman - W Moorer
    2 Michael Moorer - W Holyfield L Foreman
    3 Evander Holyfield L Moorer
    4 Riddick Bowe - W Donald Hide NC Mathis
    5 Oliver McCall - W Murph Lewis
    6 Lennox Lewis - W Jackson L McCall
    7 Tony Tucker - W Stevens Coffee Murphy
    8 Larry Holmes w Layne Ferguson
    9 Herbie Hide W Bentt
    10 James Thunder W Mackay Parez Wilson Donaldson Mason Tubbs
    11 Tony Tubbs W Martin L Thunder Nc Morris
    12 Everett Martin - L Tubbs
    13 Tim Witherspoon - W Griffin Fitch
    14 Phil Jackson - l Lewis W Card Foster
    15 Buster Mathis Jr - Biggs Griffin Fualkner McDowell Lane NC Bowe
    16 Brian Nielson - Acey Purity Smith Anderson Merritt & Others
    17 Larry Donald W Dixon Diaz Cooper Murphy L Bowe
    18 Zjelko Mavrovic W Dixon Tillman Jones Wilson & Others
    19 Joe Hipp - W McMurray Garcia Ribalta marin
    20 Alex Garcia - w O Mara Dixon Donaldson Stevens L Hipp
    21 Mike Dixon - W Bedwell moore L Donald Mavrovic Garcia
    22 Derek Williams -No Fights
    23 Corrie Sanders - W Tillman Williams De Leon Lane L Tubbs (pre rank)
    24 Garing Lane - W Jackson L Holmes Sanders Mathers
    25 Michael Bent L Hide
    26 Ray Mercer D M Wilson
    27 Jeremy Williams - w Williams Stokes Cooper Wills Billup L Donald
    28 Mark Wills - L Williams
    29 Alexander Zolkin W Swindell Williams McCain Hunter
    30 Lionel Butler - w Smith Jones
    31 Daniel Dancutta W Hall Jones Davis Robinson
    32 Adilson Rodrigues - w Neto Davis Jones & Others
    33 Jerry Jones - L Butler Dancutts Mavrovic Rodrigues
    34 Tommy Morrison - Toia Scott Griffin D Purity
    35 Frank Bruno - W Ferguson
    36 Carl Williams - L Zolkin
    37 Jesse Ferguson - L Bruno Holmes
    38 Donovan Ruddock - W Wade

    Evander Holyfield loses to michael moorer who was ranked no 34. The biggest upset since Spinks won the title and interestingly, the second World Light heavy champ in a row to go through and take the no 1 ranking.

    Although it is funny that when he fought Foreman, he was technically fighting someone who the year before was ranked above him so maybe Foreman Moorer shouldn’t be viewed as quite the upset it actually was.

    Bowe certainly seemed to have the better year than Lewis and Holyfield. It is interesting and a little surprising that Lewis and Holyfield both Lost to fighters ranked outside the top 30. And Moorer's conqueror was ranked at 27. In all time sense, that rarely happened. I am not sure what it says about the 90s. Was there an increased quality of the lower ranked fighters, compared to say the 50s and 60s, or do these losses indicate that the 90s was not really as stacked at the top as other eras? Or is there a different explanation.

    I am a little surprised that Phil Jackson at 14 was actually won of Lennox' better wins so far.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2019
  5. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    22,892
    2,459
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    Good question. I think the 1990s was still an entertaining time in the heavyweight division even if (or because) a rank outsider could walk into a championship and win it.

    After the 1980s, in the 1990s it at least seemed like it was possible to unify alphabet titles which I think at least gave the championship level men more incentive than the majority of titled contenders In that decade. I think most of the 80s alphabet holders only regarded themselves as contenders anyway. The fans took them more seriously than they should have. By comparison the 1990s guys seemed a more positive enthusiastic bunch.

    However, I had a hunch that the 1990s level must have shifted somewhat anyway. This will explain the existence of 1970s fighters being able to compete in the 1999s as grandparents ..and once again this system bares this out. Great work.
     
  6. Ra's Al-Ghul

    Ra's Al-Ghul The One and Only Full Member

    10,330
    690
    Sportsbook:
    1,218
    Oct 17, 2014
    These rankings are very odd; Herbie Hide at place 4 in 1993, but after his best win against Bentt just at 25...:confused:
    Michael Moorer just ranked at 34 in 1993, despite winning the WBO title vs. Cooper.:dunno
     
  7. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    22,892
    2,459
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    Yeah, the rules are linear. You have to beat a guy to replace him in the ranks. The alphabet rankings are bull****. These rules are legit.

    Boilermakers linear rankings are the most accurate rankings of them all. He has painstakingly compiled the results of each year and listing contenders only in order of who they replace in the ranks by actually beating them. It has never been done before and is an outstanding resource to assess things in the correct way.
     
  8. sweetsci

    sweetsci Active Member Full Member

    997
    302
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jan 22, 2008
    I think Boilermaker's rankings are simply another way to look at the history of the division. I find them to be extremely fascinating and Boilermaker's work to be extremely worthy. But they clearly have their shortcomings - Everett Martin, for instance, was never the sixth best heavyweight in the world. He only, as far as I can tell, got that high by scoring an upset win over a disinterested Witherspoon. Michael Moorer was certainly better than #34 when he challenged Holyfield. The fact that Boilermaker's ranking rules don't allow for human opinion is both a plus - no inflation of rankings because of promotional influence or favoritism - and a minus because they allow for C-level fighters to sneak in on an upset win (and then other C-level fighters to get in because they subsequently beat the C-level fighter who scored the upset).

    Organizational - WBA, WBC, IBF, WBO - rankings have been a sham since 1977 or so, when the powers that be seemingly decided that rankings would no longer be about merit but rather about promotional influence and arbitrary decisions. A good rankings system has a good degree of balance: the man who beat the man combined with human interpretation of events.
     
  9. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    22,892
    2,459
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    You make an excellent case, and I respect that. Whilst I accept that Everet big foot Martin was never the 6th best in the world I recognise that this is a small price to pay for a system that I believe is 99.9% legit the rest of the time. Just look at the alternative for context. Tony Tucker and Buster Douglas being the best two fighters in the world when they fought, or Ernie Terrell And Machen being the best two when they fought?

    You have to remember the world title organisations come up with utter nonsense most of the time.

    By comparison, Everett Martin being 6th best is a small price to pay for a system that largely has the right guy on top most of the time.
     
    sweetsci likes this.
  10. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    Thanks Ra's. That is an actually a mistake as i have put Hide in twice. from time to time this has happenes. i have fixed it now. Hide is ranked 9th. Though i take your point that Bent was perhaps surprisingly low.

    The WBO title was never considered a real heavyweight title (in relation to heavyweights at least) at this time. It had no higher status than IBO, WBF and other similar organisations. From memory at the lower weights they started to get some traction by agreeing to have title fights in Europe and other non us areas. But in the heavys it had zero legitimacy until the lucked out and Moorer came along. From memory it was the fact that Moorer was a WBO World Light heavy champion that actually legitimised the organisation a little bit, for the first time.

    Bert Cooper was a good fighter who had some decent results. But he got his "World" Championship shot at a vacant title on the strength of losses to Everett Martin, Nate Miller, George Foreman, Ray Mercer, Riddick Bowe, Evander Holyfield. (i have written off the loss to Cedric Parsons). His only wins to balance this was his win over Orlin Norris where Norris twisted his Knee and had to retire. Outside of this, i dont know what his bes win was, maybe Henry Tillman, Willie de Witt or Carlos Hernandez. When you look at coopers career, he would go on to lose to (among others) Alexander Zolkin, Craig Peterson, Mike Weaver, Larry Donald, and many others including, unless i have missed someone every single top 10 contender he ever fought. It is actually hard to understand why he is so highly rated to do. (by everyone including me before this post). When you look at it, he didnt achieve as much as Brian Nielson, James Thunder, Everett Martin or Garing Lane, just to pick some random names.
     
  11. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    You do definitely see blips such as the Martin one. But they do correct themself over time.

    In an ideal world (perhaps), an independent body would use these lineal rankings and stop the blips. It is probably not a bad idea to put in something like a rule that where a fighter loses three times to a fighter more than 10 spots or more below them, then they should drop off the rankings.

    To me though the key is not so much stopping the blip but publishing the rankings system. For example, if this was the only system used, the best fighters would be jumping on Everett Martin and other "easy" rankings gains with big money offers to fight and the natural order would be restored even quicker.

    It is actually quite amazing to me that the blips correct each other so quickly as it is. The C level fighters virtually never stay above the A level fighters for more than a year or so. The biggest losers are probably the up and coming fighters who look impressive in the way that they win but dont really seem to risk their rankings much. But if they dont fight and beat fighters how can you rank on Potential or How they look?

    i havent cross checked ring ratings, but the top 10 are nearly always substantially the same as these rankings. Looks pretty similar How or why did the Ring Title become vacant? i cant remember

    Title Vacant
    1. This content is protected
    2. This content is protected
    3. This content is protected
    4. This content is protected
    5. This content is protected
    6. This content is protected
    7. This content is protected
    8. This content is protected
    9. This content is protected
    10. This content is protected

    Akinwande Gonzalez and Butler are the main differences. Not sure what these three did to rank over Tucker, Thunder and Holyfield. Holyfield's retiement probably helped and to be honest, i think i would have tipped Tony Tubbs to beat Lionel Butler.
     
    sweetsci likes this.
  12. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    No system is ever going to be 100% perfect. I mean every day on these boards you will see disagreement over which of 2 fighters are the best fighters, even after they have a fight and a declared winner. Sometimes after a fighter has been cleanly knocked out. YOu will never find the perfect system. At the end of the day you can only find some type of fair system. The only alternative is some type of points for a win system but i dont see how it is fair that fighters can lose rankings to fighters who beat people who were lower ranked or not as good as the fghter they are beating. The good part is that this system has the potential to give context to every single fight.

    An organisation is limited. You cant assess every fighter. If done properly, something like boxrec could have a legitimate top 1000 for every single fighter. That has to be exciting for the journeyman type club fighters and help keep them focussed and stay in the game. I would imagine that it would be a huge honour for some fighters to crack the top 100! Anyway, this is getting a little bit theoretical.
     
    sweetsci and choklab like this.
  13. Ra's Al-Ghul

    Ra's Al-Ghul The One and Only Full Member

    10,330
    690
    Sportsbook:
    1,218
    Oct 17, 2014
    But makes this any sense to have Hide before his win over Bentt (his best opponent up to the date) 21 place higher, when he had no win over someone decent and downgrade him one year later?:dunno:thinking::watchout:

    Ithink there was rather done a mistake (and some more are in it too), as Hide was rather that high listed in 1997, not in 1993.

    By the way did held Foreman the ring magazine trophy after the knockout over Moorer, but vacated after the Schulz defence in April 1995.
     
  14. sweetsci

    sweetsci Active Member Full Member

    997
    302
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jan 22, 2008
    Re: Foreman and the Ring belt.
    Ring magazine stopped recognizing champions in early 1990 when the magazine changed publishers. At that time they only recognized a straight 1 through 10.

    It wasn't until late 2001 that they listed champions again and instituted what I think was called the "Ring Championship Policy." So Foreman never held a Ring title during the 1990s because the Ring title didn't exist at that time.
     
  15. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,213
    273
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Oct 6, 2004
    That mistake has been fixed now. What other mistakes are there?
     


Sign up for ESPN+ and Stream Live Sports! Advertisement