Vasyl Lomachenko - The Best Opposition Ratio of all time

Well it's not worth arguing then. Mayweather is 50-0! Loma has 1 loss in his 8th pro fight, he'll never be as good as Mayweather. Numbers have no agenda right?

Numbers can be interpreted to your agenda.

 

Floyd has 8 amateur losses....you are absolutely right

 

Lomachenko 406-2
Mayweather 134-8

 

Oh so now you're arguing about another subject? As I said, you have agenda. Yes, Loma has the best amateur record that I know of. Kudos to him.

 

Another subject lol?
I thought we were talking about boxing

 

End of discussion. Floyd has tasted defeat (Both in and out of the ring) Way more than Loma has

This content is protected

 

I beg to quarrel with you a little here; In 25 fights Ali Raymi fought 22 undefeated fighters, one of them 3 times (Prince Maz's only three losses). So if Floyd is a 6 on this Ratio and Chenko is an 18. Raymi must be like a 97!

 

How is that possible when none of his opponents EVER lost to anyone else?

I mean, I will admit math wasn't my best subject.

 

Well it is a made up stat.

 

If we're combining amateur and pro records then Andre Ward has a better record than Floyd too at 147-5. Jose Napoles would be 194-8. Ray Leonard would be 201-8 the same as Nino Benvenuti. Mark Breland is 145-4. Golovkin is 382-5. Alexander Povetkin is 158-8. Seems like a lot of guys have better records than Mayweather's 134-8. Joe Calzaghe would be 158-10 with just two more losses than Floyd. Rigonedeaux would be 480-13.

 

As a pure average Lomachenko is #1, but like I said before, the median is more accurate, and there I've already shown that De La Hoya, Mayweather, Ray Leonard, Pacquiao, and Tszyu have better opponents. Both methods have flaws. For instance, neither takes into account the quality of opponents and a 32-0 opponent could be all padded resume or a hall of famer. But yours seems especially biased against people who started low and gradually built up to excellent competition even if they maintained that level for twenty years. I've seen guys with stellar records who beat a who's who of their division for decades get dropped beneath absolute nobodies because they chose to fight one or two bums with awful records at the beginning or tail end of their careers.

I want to take note of two of the higher scoring boxers in your averages system. Andre Ward padded his resume the same as everyone else coming up. He didn't really fight a live body until about his 19th fight. He fought young pros without a lot of wins or losses. He just didn't fight anybody who'd been in the game a while and picked up a lot of losses. That's why his median opponent is only 17-1. He fought good competition in the latter half of his career, but half of his career is clearly record padding.

Then there's Myung Woo Yuh. Sure, he's got the record for the most consecutive title defenses at light flyweight, and that ought to count for something. Usually guys with a lot of title fights will do well with your rubrick because they aren't out fighting bums all the time. But look at who his defenses are against. He fought two opponents with 30 or more fights. He fought nine guys in their debut. Most of his opponents don't have even twenty fights. His median opponent is 13-2. That's not elite competition. That's a symptom of a shallow weight division and no attempt at unification fights. It looks like he avoided Jung Koo Chang, Michael Carbajal, and Humberto Gonzalez during his reign. The problem with the average system is that those 9 debut boxers all count as undefeated and don't hurt his average record. It's padding that goes unpenalized.

 

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

You are lumping Lomo in with boxers who had dozens of fights, meanwhile he has what? 11 fights? You are not comparing Apples to apples. Surely the number of fights a boxer has had should be included in this equation.