Official ESB Rankings -- Vote Now

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Lampley, Sep 12, 2007.


Page 4 of 8
  1. Lampley

    Lampley Boxing Junkie banned

    7,508
    3
    Oct 30, 2005
    The two major problems with a purely democratic vote are that you'll include people who aren't qualified or have an agenda, and that the rankings will skew heavily toward more popular and American fighters.

    In a sense, every thread started on the board is a vote, and anyone is free to participate.

    But for Official ESB Rankings, I think you need them to be expert in nature in order for the effort to be worthwhile.

    Maybe we should, through discussion, select 10 members, then let everyone vote on the other 10. I just want to make sure the great European posters are represented, who may not spend quite as much time on the General Forum.
     
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    #46
  2. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    Perhaps a seperate vote for European, the Americas, and then World (asian Aussie, etc, since I don't think there are as many of them individually?) Then the committee is fairly represented on all sides.
     
    kg0208, Sep 12, 2007
    kg0208, Sep 12, 2007
    #47
  3. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Please look at the ESB top analyst thread that I posted already...

    http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8845&page=8

    Achillesthegreat
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    1013.51%Amsterdam
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    1418.92%cross_trainer
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    2635.14%janitor
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    22.70%john garfield
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    79.46%JohnThomas1
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    22.70%McGrain
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    68.11%sean
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    This content is protected
    45.41%Zakman


    Aren't there enough Europeans in the top 10?
     
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    #48
  4. Lampley

    Lampley Boxing Junkie banned

    7,508
    3
    Oct 30, 2005
    I agree, but I don't think we have any fair way of doing that initially. If we start with 20 for October and have the initial vote for rankings as well as the initial process for voting on new members, hopefully we'll add a bunch of enthusiastic, expert posters who will bump up the numbers for November and December.

    It's just too difficult to pull names out of thin air. Let the posters nominate themselves, and their track records will speak for themselves.
     
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    #49
  5. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    I think that is a bad idea...then we'll start to calibrate according to the numbers from each area...let's keep it simple and have faith that the top analysts would agree the right top 10 contenders, before we all decide the order they come in.
     
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    #50
  6. Lampley

    Lampley Boxing Junkie banned

    7,508
    3
    Oct 30, 2005
    Interesting thought.

    First things first, I'll work on a constitution to explain how this madness can work, and then we'll get to the selection of initial voters.
     
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    #51
  7. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    Well that would mean I agree the top analysts are the choice. I don't and have stated why.

    I read your analyst thread and it was stated there as well. There is a difference in analysis knowledge and historical knowledge. Historical knowledge is more important here, or at least the process by which historical knowledge is gathered and portrayed. Rankings and fight predictions are not the same IMO.

    I still do not see a clear and concise way of doing any of these things, and Lampley is right that a democratic process will be skewed.
     
    kg0208, Sep 12, 2007
    kg0208, Sep 12, 2007
    #52
  8. Lampley

    Lampley Boxing Junkie banned

    7,508
    3
    Oct 30, 2005
    I agree that it's a very good group, but I don't think we should be bound by it. But yes, that's an excellent starting point.
     
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    #53
  9. Lampley

    Lampley Boxing Junkie banned

    7,508
    3
    Oct 30, 2005
    I agree, which is why you need the right people. We might have to exclude a few who have agendas against certain fighters, in order to maintain fairness. Then, if they get voted on in October, that's great. It means the system is working.
     
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    #54
  10. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Fine, let's start afresh! Let's have an identical "nominations counter", but instead of it being for ESP TOP ANALYST, it would be for ESB OFFICIAL RANKINGS COMMITTEE MEMBER...

    Every poster can nominate once. Once we count the nominations, we take the top 1o or 2o with most nominations, and they become the COMMITTEE members.

    They are responsible for selecting to top ten contenders.

    We then decide the order they come in.

    Agreed?
     
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    #55
  11. Claypole

    Claypole Boxing Addict banned

    7,071
    4
    Aug 4, 2007
    I've changed my mind about the committee. It might not be perfect, but it's simple way to get the ball rolling. Perhaps potential committee members would nominate themselves and it gets put to a ballot which is open to all. Any flaws in the system would show up pretty quickly.
     
    Claypole, Sep 12, 2007
    Claypole, Sep 12, 2007
    #56
  12. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Anybody there?:think
     
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    #57
  13. Lampley

    Lampley Boxing Junkie banned

    7,508
    3
    Oct 30, 2005
    I like your idea for selecting the members, although maybe 15 of them would be good, and then we can handpick the other 5 to add balance or fill in gaps.

    But I think we still have to avoid having everyone vote regardless of qualification. Over time, I'd imagine that all of the good and regular posters will make it, excluding those who show obvious bias.

    First things first, I need to start working on the constitution that will keep this thing moving forward once we've gotten it started.

    I know this stuff usually doesn't work, but I want to give it a serious go and see if we can make it truly worthwhile for the ESB community.
     
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    Lampley, Sep 12, 2007
    #58
  14. C Money

    C Money Paul McCloskey Full Member

    7,839
    0
    Feb 8, 2007

    I like this better.


    Also to Decebal, yes a voting process would be the most democratic way to arrive at the group.

    A sub-group is any grouping that represents the boards but doesnt include a one vote/one poster situation.
     
    C Money, Sep 12, 2007
    C Money, Sep 12, 2007
    #59
  15. Decebal

    Decebal Lucian Bute Full Member

    34,525
    7
    Mar 10, 2007
    Careful, mate! You have to get it right first time! If it's a flop the way you run it - it's game over for this great idea...We should have a vote for who should run this thing...I know it's your idea...but we have to be sure to get it right FIRST TIME!

    Handpicking is a shot in the foot - it discredits everything! What is the point of the whole ESB rankings system that involves everyone if you don't trust the ESB members to pick the right people to be on the committee?

    Having a committee that is too big (larger than 15) ensures decisions are less biased, but makes decisions much harder to take (and longer)...I think we should stick to 10 because ten are the number of options in the polls - it will make their decision making much easier...and ours...if we want to blackball one of them...for whatever reason, later.

    Leaving people out on the basis of expertise or qualifications defeats the whole point of this thing! We want to bring as many people as possible to the site, create a movement...if we don't do so...we might as well let the committee decide the rankings on their own, after we decide who is on the committee...
     
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    Decebal, Sep 12, 2007
    #60
Page 4 of 8