Statistical Analysis: Hopkins, Jones Jr, Toney, Calzaghe

Hang on, did Roy earn points for being knocked out by Glen Johnson, or was I misreading? Wowzaz....

 

well, an interesting idea man. but there is a massive human error problem, and you admitting a bias shattered your whole post hehe...

 

Their resumes are still clearly better though, simple as that.

 

aye thats right.

your intetnions might have been sound but things just aren't that simple.

 

when was jones inconsistent pre-ruiz? it's way too convenient what you're suggesting and not realistic.

you said you and a friend have debated this a lot and the time you've spent sorting this out is commendable, but please don't think that because you've come up with a formula to 'sort out the problem' that it's the right one.

boxing will always be a can of worms because of so many variables that can't be put in a box like you're doing.

 

To the original poster......good work.

I don't agree with your results...they suck. But the idea is good and I like it when people think outside the square and try new things.

Respect.

 

Another note to the original poster:

When your "Statistical analysis" is based completely on subjective ratings instead of factual data, it is not really "statistical" analysis. Statistics requires factual, measurable data.


K?

 

I'm liking your posts more and more these days.

 

You do have a point Jones defeats were more crushing but the perception of Hopkins after the Taylor and Calzaghe losses was that he was as shot similar to Jones .

 

I stopped when you started rating a win over Pavlik as better than a win over McCallum.

 

:huh