Looks like they cut them by at least half? I didn't see an explanation on their website. Dumb change, would rather see more points to help distinguish not less points.
You need something Nonito, the sport is too big to follow everything on your own. Boxrec is a tool, a very useful tool, just like this forum whatever their inaccuracies and biases.
Hmmm. Odd. They haven't just subtracted a chunk of points like they do when a fighter has been fighting sub par opponents for too long but seem to have rejigged their formula to apply to old fights. Have you tried signing upto Boxrec and checking their forum? - there's very likely to be something on there about it - I'd do it myself but I'm kinda busy today. And yeah - I'm noticing some folk being totally dismissive of Boxrec, and their points system does leave a lot to be desired, but it is an additional tool and IMO a useful one, especially when trying to gauge fighters with relatively little mainstream exposure. It also, unlike many other ranking systems is effectively free from 'hype' or geographical bias.
Sadly true. Compared to some of the rankings Ive seen in the "legitimate sanctioning bodies", Boxrec looks like the gold standard
List of WBA top-15: Fury Browne 1. Luis Ortiz (Interim) 2. Wladimir Klitschko 3. Alexander Ustinov 4. Fres Oquendo 5. Andrey Fedosov 6. Ruslan Chagaev 7. Shannon Briggs 8. Antonio Tarver 9. David Haye 10. Erkan Tepe 11. Joseph Parker 12. Jarrell Miller 13. Solomon Haumono 14. Trevor Bryan 15. Kubrat Pulev :huh:-(
BoxRec rankings are useful IMO, usually it gets a decent enough insight into who the top 10 are in the division. Though their p4p rankings are a lot less useful. (but who really cares about p4p anyway)
